Why do people talk about "liberal bias" when the phrase is technically an oxymoron?

[Bush92]

Liberal bias has been factually proven years ago. This thread is irrelevant.

 

[longknife]

:Liberal, like most political terms, has been hijacked to make it something it never was meant to be. Original liberals based their views on freedom - something which modern do-called liberals seem opposed to.

The same holds true with all the other jingoistic words which are only shaped to mean whatever the user wishes them to be.

 

[BlackSand]

The desire to cite politics as a measure is where your ideas fail ... In that a conservative doesn't require your cooperation, approval, funding, politics or government to accomplish what they are going to do either way.

Now you're just moving the goal posts. I'm talking politics on a 'Politics' board. I think you're the one that's confused.

I am a conservative and I vote ... That qualifies as politics. I am not confused about anything ... Nor do I suggest that politics has much to offer a true conservative.

The goal posts aren't moving for me and never have ... Only Liberals need to adjust the goal posts so everyone can score. If you find yourself without the ability to achieve the goal ... It isn't my fault you lost track of where the goal is.

.

 

[Bush92]

:Liberal, like most political terms, has been hijacked to make it something it never was meant to be. Original liberals based their views on freedom - something which modern do-called liberals seem opposed to.

The same holds true with all the other jingoistic words which are only shaped to mean whatever the user wishes them to be.

Just like the word "gay" was hijacked.

 

[peach174]

:Liberal, like most political terms, has been hijacked to make it something it never was meant to be. Original liberals based their views on freedom - something which modern do-called liberals seem opposed to.

The same holds true with all the other jingoistic words which are only shaped to mean whatever the user wishes them to be.

Especially when the original liberals heard the word taxes they yelled back freedom.

 

[eagle1462010]

Cartoon from a far right blogger is your argument?

About MEX

It fits the intent of the thread. You bitch about how righteous liberals are and ditch anyone who opposes your views. The picture is spot on with the typical rants as you ignore any data that ditches your ideology. I've stated both sides have raised the debt and to our countries detriment. Obama and the left in office have hit the gas pedal on spending. Doubled down on debt and bitch and moan anytime someone wants to reign in spending.

I don't believe in subsidizing ANY PRIVATE COMPANY. They should stand or fall on their own and not get assistance from the taxpayer.

But subsidizing companies isn't really the major problem. As any cost increases are added to the price of the product anyway. Extra taxation on these types of issues is always paid for by the consumer. Yet your side goes with the RANT tax the shit out of them because you are too danged stupid to understand that you will be paying for it anyway. Strong economic nations throughout history have always been about having a strong Middle Class paying for the Gov't. Not the finite few that you continually bitch about.

That is reality. Something your side doesn't care about. Your side is always looking for a new cause to get the Feds to spend money on.............When you get your way, you think of more. A never ending cycle of stuck on spending your asses off, Bush was liberal on spending I complained about that all the time. He went with the Dems on issues spending money,,,,,,,,,,,,but the Dems kept saying to SPEND MORE............NOT ENOUGH..........and then bitch about his spending when their alternate bills were projected at douible the cost.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No bias or hatred in liberalism, unless you disagree with them. Just ask a conservative black man.

Liberals are supposed to agree with a conservative just because he's black? lol

How many liberal black men do you agree with?

Liberals usually cannot tell the difference between disagreement and bias or hatred. If they could understand the difference ... They would have to address the fact they are not perfect and don't have the correct answer to every equation.

.

So your claim is that conservatives disagree with President Obama in such dignified mature reasonable rational way that it could never possibly be seen as hateful.

Goddam, you win the prize! lol

How are they suppose to act when the President calls them the enemy in 2010?

By your actions you are the enemy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

:Liberal, like most political terms, has been hijacked to make it something it never was meant to be. Original liberals based their views on freedom - something which modern do-called liberals seem opposed to.

The same holds true with all the other jingoistic words which are only shaped to mean whatever the user wishes them to be.

Just like the word "gay" was hijacked.

By who? By you and your endless stream of gayass threads? lol

 

[Derideo_Te]

Hello. I thought this would be the best forum to ask this and I've wondered it for a few years now. It doesn't make sense if you think about it (even by con standards). Liberalism is neutral by definition. The farther to the right you move, the more partisan you become. It's an obvious fact if you look at the US today. The Left is where all of the groups fighting for social justice and against bigotry and intolerance lay. The more right wing an individual or group is, the more they represent causes that the Left opposes.

Homosexuality is a good example. Liberals have always fought to represent their needs and educate people not to treat them poorly because of their orientation. The GOP ran on an explicitly anti-gay platform roughly a decade ago. Reproductive rights is another. It's the Left that safeguards women's right to choose when and whether to have children and gives them options to deal with unwanted pregnancies and support if they choose to keep them. The Right is where all of the misogynists find support for their explicitly anti-choice agenda. They're the ones who think it's moral to enslave half of the population just because they have wombs and force them to have as many children as possible.

These are just a few examples of why bias just isn't part of the liberal equation. The entire point of liberalism is defeating bias and giving everyone the exact same rights and quality of life regardless of their personal identity and life choices. Wouldn't it follow then that the only bias possible is conservative bias, ie towards the status quo?

1. Liberalism is NOT neutral, by any defination.
2. LIberalism as practiced by progressives is the most extreme form of ideology there is.
3. The nation has been getting more and more extreme (moving leftward) every decade. What you would call rightwing today, was moderately leftwing 30 years ago.

Last. You're an idiot.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

St Reagan would never make it through today's extreme rightwing primaries because he would be way too "liberal" for the Tea Party voters.

The facts are that the extreme right has moved so far to the right that they are no longer capable of thinking, instead they just emote.

30 years of ever greater extremism by the far right has resulted in wars, economic collapse and the financial gutting of the middle class while enriching only the 1%.

Those are indisputable facts.

 

[jknowgood]

No bias or hatred in liberalism, unless you disagree with them. Just ask a conservative black man.

Liberals are supposed to agree with a conservative just because he's black? lol

How many liberal black men do you agree with?

Liberals usually cannot tell the difference between disagreement and bias or hatred. If they could understand the difference ... They would have to address the fact they are not perfect and don't have the correct answer to every equation.

.

So your claim is that conservatives disagree with President Obama in such dignified mature reasonable rational way that it could never possibly be seen as hateful.

Goddam, you win the prize! lol

How are they suppose to act when the President calls them the enemy in 2010?

By your actions you are the enemy.

By Obama's actions liberals are the enemy on any view imaginable. Hateful as well.

 

[eagle1462010]

Hello. I thought this would be the best forum to ask this and I've wondered it for a few years now. It doesn't make sense if you think about it (even by con standards). Liberalism is neutral by definition. The farther to the right you move, the more partisan you become. It's an obvious fact if you look at the US today. The Left is where all of the groups fighting for social justice and against bigotry and intolerance lay. The more right wing an individual or group is, the more they represent causes that the Left opposes.

Homosexuality is a good example. Liberals have always fought to represent their needs and educate people not to treat them poorly because of their orientation. The GOP ran on an explicitly anti-gay platform roughly a decade ago. Reproductive rights is another. It's the Left that safeguards women's right to choose when and whether to have children and gives them options to deal with unwanted pregnancies and support if they choose to keep them. The Right is where all of the misogynists find support for their explicitly anti-choice agenda. They're the ones who think it's moral to enslave half of the population just because they have wombs and force them to have as many children as possible.

These are just a few examples of why bias just isn't part of the liberal equation. The entire point of liberalism is defeating bias and giving everyone the exact same rights and quality of life regardless of their personal identity and life choices. Wouldn't it follow then that the only bias possible is conservative bias, ie towards the status quo?

1. Liberalism is NOT neutral, by any defination.
2. LIberalism as practiced by progressives is the most extreme form of ideology there is.
3. The nation has been getting more and more extreme (moving leftward) every decade. What you would call rightwing today, was moderately leftwing 30 years ago.

Last. You're an idiot.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

St Reagan would never make it through today's extreme rightwing primaries because he would be way too "liberal" for the Tea Party voters.

The facts are that the extreme right has moved so far to the right that they are no longer capable of thinking, instead they just emote.

30 years of ever greater extremism by the far right has resulted in wars, economic collapse and the financial gutting of the middle class while enriching only the 1%.

Those are indisputable facts.

Tea Party wants to cut up the credit cards and stop creating more debt. Which means living within our means and stop kicking the can down the road. In stead of more bloated Gov't spending passing the bill to our kids.

Your side whines like spoiled brats for a 1% cut as do the Rhino's.

Your side always wants more rules and regulations for freaking everything, as you ignore the damage of these rules Your path is ECONOMIC SUICIDE for this NATION.

Dare to attempt cutting................the usual name calling and standard BS from the ASS HAT PARTY.

 

[peach174]

No bias or hatred in liberalism, unless you disagree with them. Just ask a conservative black man.

Liberals are supposed to agree with a conservative just because he's black? lol

How many liberal black men do you agree with?

Liberals usually cannot tell the difference between disagreement and bias or hatred. If they could understand the difference ... They would have to address the fact they are not perfect and don't have the correct answer to every equation.

.

So your claim is that conservatives disagree with President Obama in such dignified mature reasonable rational way that it could never possibly be seen as hateful.

Goddam, you win the prize! lol

How are they suppose to act when the President calls them the enemy in 2010?

By your actions you are the enemy.

So being opposed to the other party who had the House, Senate and Presidency is now the enemy?
Many Presidents had to deal with those in the minority and they worked with them. They never called them the enemy.

 

[Derideo_Te]

No bias or hatred in liberalism, unless you disagree with them. Just ask a conservative black man.

Liberals are supposed to agree with a conservative just because he's black? lol

How many liberal black men do you agree with?

Liberals usually cannot tell the difference between disagreement and bias or hatred. If they could understand the difference ... They would have to address the fact they are not perfect and don't have the correct answer to every equation.

.

But the extreme right are perfect and do have the correct answers?

 

[jknowgood]

No bias or hatred in liberalism, unless you disagree with them. Just ask a conservative black man.

Liberals are supposed to agree with a conservative just because he's black? lol

How many liberal black men do you agree with?

Liberals usually cannot tell the difference between disagreement and bias or hatred. If they could understand the difference ... They would have to address the fact they are not perfect and don't have the correct answer to every equation.

.

But the extreme right are perfect and do have the correct answers?

No one has all the correct answers, but liberals have mostly wrong answers.

 

[peach174]

Hello. I thought this would be the best forum to ask this and I've wondered it for a few years now. It doesn't make sense if you think about it (even by con standards). Liberalism is neutral by definition. The farther to the right you move, the more partisan you become. It's an obvious fact if you look at the US today. The Left is where all of the groups fighting for social justice and against bigotry and intolerance lay. The more right wing an individual or group is, the more they represent causes that the Left opposes.

Homosexuality is a good example. Liberals have always fought to represent their needs and educate people not to treat them poorly because of their orientation. The GOP ran on an explicitly anti-gay platform roughly a decade ago. Reproductive rights is another. It's the Left that safeguards women's right to choose when and whether to have children and gives them options to deal with unwanted pregnancies and support if they choose to keep them. The Right is where all of the misogynists find support for their explicitly anti-choice agenda. They're the ones who think it's moral to enslave half of the population just because they have wombs and force them to have as many children as possible.

These are just a few examples of why bias just isn't part of the liberal equation. The entire point of liberalism is defeating bias and giving everyone the exact same rights and quality of life regardless of their personal identity and life choices. Wouldn't it follow then that the only bias possible is conservative bias, ie towards the status quo?

1. Liberalism is NOT neutral, by any defination.
2. LIberalism as practiced by progressives is the most extreme form of ideology there is.
3. The nation has been getting more and more extreme (moving leftward) every decade. What you would call rightwing today, was moderately leftwing 30 years ago.

Last. You're an idiot.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

St Reagan would never make it through today's extreme rightwing primaries because he would be way too "liberal" for the Tea Party voters.

The facts are that the extreme right has moved so far to the right that they are no longer capable of thinking, instead they just emote.

30 years of ever greater extremism by the far right has resulted in wars, economic collapse and the financial gutting of the middle class while enriching only the 1%.

Those are indisputable facts.

They are not facts.
Those are lefty opinions

 

[peach174]

No bias or hatred in liberalism, unless you disagree with them. Just ask a conservative black man.

Liberals are supposed to agree with a conservative just because he's black? lol

How many liberal black men do you agree with?

Liberals usually cannot tell the difference between disagreement and bias or hatred. If they could understand the difference ... They would have to address the fact they are not perfect and don't have the correct answer to every equation.

.

But the extreme right are perfect and do have the correct answers?

Nobody in this world is perfect but wanting to get government under control is a better way than to keep spending.

 

[jknowgood]

Hello. I thought this would be the best forum to ask this and I've wondered it for a few years now. It doesn't make sense if you think about it (even by con standards). Liberalism is neutral by definition. The farther to the right you move, the more partisan you become. It's an obvious fact if you look at the US today. The Left is where all of the groups fighting for social justice and against bigotry and intolerance lay. The more right wing an individual or group is, the more they represent causes that the Left opposes.

Homosexuality is a good example. Liberals have always fought to represent their needs and educate people not to treat them poorly because of their orientation. The GOP ran on an explicitly anti-gay platform roughly a decade ago. Reproductive rights is another. It's the Left that safeguards women's right to choose when and whether to have children and gives them options to deal with unwanted pregnancies and support if they choose to keep them. The Right is where all of the misogynists find support for their explicitly anti-choice agenda. They're the ones who think it's moral to enslave half of the population just because they have wombs and force them to have as many children as possible.

These are just a few examples of why bias just isn't part of the liberal equation. The entire point of liberalism is defeating bias and giving everyone the exact same rights and quality of life regardless of their personal identity and life choices. Wouldn't it follow then that the only bias possible is conservative bias, ie towards the status quo?

1. Liberalism is NOT neutral, by any defination.
2. LIberalism as practiced by progressives is the most extreme form of ideology there is.
3. The nation has been getting more and more extreme (moving leftward) every decade. What you would call rightwing today, was moderately leftwing 30 years ago.

Last. You're an idiot.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

St Reagan would never make it through today's extreme rightwing primaries because he would be way too "liberal" for the Tea Party voters.

The facts are that the extreme right has moved so far to the right that they are no longer capable of thinking, instead they just emote.

30 years of ever greater extremism by the far right has resulted in wars, economic collapse and the financial gutting of the middle class while enriching only the 1%.

Those are indisputable facts.

They are not facts.
Those are lefty opinions

He doesn't know jack, Reagan would embrace the tea party.

 

[occupied]

There is a liberal bias. In such a hard world full of hate, exploitation, mistrust and almost casual brutality, anyone trying to make it a gentler, more equitable place is expressing a view that the reactionary self-absorbed right just cannot grasp. Liberalism is a view that rejects the premise of "that's just how it is, accept it" popular among the right for one that knows we humans are capable making this world a good place for everyone to live. The liberal bias is hope in the face of intractable despair.

 

[peach174]

Hello. I thought this would be the best forum to ask this and I've wondered it for a few years now. It doesn't make sense if you think about it (even by con standards). Liberalism is neutral by definition. The farther to the right you move, the more partisan you become. It's an obvious fact if you look at the US today. The Left is where all of the groups fighting for social justice and against bigotry and intolerance lay. The more right wing an individual or group is, the more they represent causes that the Left opposes.

Homosexuality is a good example. Liberals have always fought to represent their needs and educate people not to treat them poorly because of their orientation. The GOP ran on an explicitly anti-gay platform roughly a decade ago. Reproductive rights is another. It's the Left that safeguards women's right to choose when and whether to have children and gives them options to deal with unwanted pregnancies and support if they choose to keep them. The Right is where all of the misogynists find support for their explicitly anti-choice agenda. They're the ones who think it's moral to enslave half of the population just because they have wombs and force them to have as many children as possible.

These are just a few examples of why bias just isn't part of the liberal equation. The entire point of liberalism is defeating bias and giving everyone the exact same rights and quality of life regardless of their personal identity and life choices. Wouldn't it follow then that the only bias possible is conservative bias, ie towards the status quo?

1. Liberalism is NOT neutral, by any defination.
2. LIberalism as practiced by progressives is the most extreme form of ideology there is.
3. The nation has been getting more and more extreme (moving leftward) every decade. What you would call rightwing today, was moderately leftwing 30 years ago.

Last. You're an idiot.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

St Reagan would never make it through today's extreme rightwing primaries because he would be way too "liberal" for the Tea Party voters.

The facts are that the extreme right has moved so far to the right that they are no longer capable of thinking, instead they just emote.

30 years of ever greater extremism by the far right has resulted in wars, economic collapse and the financial gutting of the middle class while enriching only the 1%.

Those are indisputable facts.

They are not facts.
Those are lefty opinions

He doesn't know jack, Reagan would embrace the tea party.

Tea party is saying the exact same thing that Regan said, that "Government is the problem".

 

[Stephanie]

lol, This was the perfect example of why they say:

LIBERALISM is a mental disorder and just how they believe they are g-ds gift to man kind.

I'm always amazed when they post it as if people will just believe it