Why liberals hate values

[musicman]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
[B.

" I do, however, believe that quality public education for all, with a solid foundation in the classics as well as sound reasoning skills are the best thing that government can do for society. "


So, the Declaration of Independence should have read, ".... among these rights are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, quality public education for all, free healthcare, the right not to have your feelings hurt...."?



"As for values, I do not believe in a supreme being. Thus my morals and values are rooted in the real consequences to real people... in this life and in this world... that my actions have. Thus, the moral "payoff" occurs here and now, and can either benefit me or adversely affect me. here and now. Human life, and the consequences of my actions upon it, provides my moral compass. With your moral structure, any attrocity can be condoned so long as it is done in the name of one's favorite deity."


If you commit murder and get away with it, there ARE no real consequences - here...now. Using your moral compass, who, then, outside yourself, has the right to say that your action was wrong? It can't have been wrong - there were no consequences!
Absent some moral authority ouside yourself and your personal concept of right and wrong, what is society to do - hope that you're really an OK guy who just lost his head for a minute?

[/B]

 

[MrMarbles]

Here are my links

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/05/31/business/gdp_040531 for Canada

For USA

http://www.epinet.org/

 

[MrMarbles]

oops.... http://www.epinet.org/

there it is.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by MrMarbles
oops.... http://www.epinet.org/

there it is.

Look at the year, not a month. Besides, the government stats of both countries are a better way to go. You know that, you know that I know that you know that. :

 

[acludem]

Liberal does NOT equal socialist in America. Anyone who thinks that doesn't understand what socialism is. Most of our allied in Europe are what can be termed Social Democracies. Most of them have some government owned utilities, they have socialized or somewhat socialized (Germany and France) medical systems, and most have a far greater tax rate than we do.

There are NO government owned utilities in this country, nor do we have socialized medicine (and, no, the Clinton plan was not socialized medicine in the way it is done in Europe). You don't see Democrats and/or Liberals proposing that the government buy utilities do you? You often hear that everyone ought to have health insurance of some sort though. Let's examine that. In most European countries, EVERY citizen is covered by the same insurance, socialized medicine. Proposals calling for assistance for the millions of Americans with no health insurance do not include insuring everyone the same, therefore this is NOT socialized medicine.

So stop with this bullshit about liberals being socialists.

acludem

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by acludem
Liberal does NOT equal socialist in America.

MMMM. Pretty much, yes it does.

Anyone who thinks that doesn't understand what socialism is. Most of our allied in Europe are what can be termed Social Democracies. Most of them have some government owned utilities, they have socialized or somewhat socialized (Germany and France) medical systems, and most have a far greater tax rate than we do.

To the detriment of the economy.

There are NO government owned utilities in this country, nor do we have socialized medicine (and, no, the Clinton plan was not socialized medicine in the way it is done in Europe).

Yes. because we've stopped the liberals.

You don't see Democrats and/or Liberals proposing that the government buy utilities do you? You often hear that everyone ought to have health insurance of some sort though. Let's examine that. In most European countries, EVERY citizen is covered by the same insurance, socialized medicine. Proposals calling for assistance for the millions of Americans with no health insurance do not include insuring everyone the same, therefore this is NOT socialized medicine.

So stop with this bullshit about liberals being socialists.

acludem

I guess they're technically not socialists, since they're still living in our relatively capitalist system, but they WANT socialism. A more precise term is WANNABE-SOCIALIST, I guess.

 

[MrMarbles]

My point with our economy was the fact that Canada, as a social democracy, has a fine economy, one that grows and recends in due fashion. It does not crash and horribaly suck. Like americas, it moves with the time. Not doomed to fail.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by MrMarbles
My point with our economy was the fact that Canada, as a social democracy, has a fine economy, one that grows and recends in due fashion. It does not crash and horribaly suck. Like americas, it moves with the time. Not doomed to fail.

Doomed to fail? I think that's just wishful thinking on your part.

Thanks for your support.

 

[brneyedgrl80]

rtwngAvngr, where do you get this hatered of liberals from? Why do you believe we are evil? Do you believe i am evil? I believe that everyone is equal. I agree with bullypulpit, in the fact that we should think of the here and now, and our fellow man, is that evil? And if so, what is evil about it? Isn't everyone equal?

Say it isn't so RWA!! You don't really hate all liberals do you?

 

[Captain_Steel]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
In as much as family/traditional values teach personal responsibility, commitment, self-reliance and faith in god, they are anathema to the liberal agenda. For the libs to empower themselves through government, they need weak citizens, who can't take care of themselves. Responsible, successful people don't need government to the extent libs wish to push it down our throats. Therefore, libs try to do away with anything that makes people succesful without government help, like morals, and values.

I've heard Micheal Savage talk about the Weimar republic in Germany where the society was completely devoid of morals and values. No limits on anything. This was right where Hitler made his move and gained power over the country.

So I agree, weak morals make a weak population who isn't going to object to anything. Just the way the democrats want it.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by MrMarbles
...Canada, as a social democracy, has a fine economy, one that grows and recends in due fashion...

Recends? I know you all speak French and English up there in Oh, Canada! but I doubt recends resides in either dictionaries.

 

[MrMarbles]

Originally posted by nycflasher
Recends? I know you all speak French and English up there in Oh, Canada! but I doubt recends resides in either dictionaries.

Recends, decend, retreats, fails, falls, pulls back, whatever you like.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by MrMarbles
Recends, decend, retreats, fails, falls, pulls back, whatever you like.

Either way, libs hate values because values make individuals stronger. Big government liberals prefer weak individuals.

 

[acludem]

You have it backwards - the right wing hates individualism. They want conformity. Independent thought scares them. The right says "individualism" when what they really mean is selfishness. The right wants to expand massively the power of government to control thought, writing, music, and other mediums of art and communication. They seek programs like "Total Information Awareness" to smite individualism in favor of a totalitarian conformist state.

acludem

 

[Merlin1047]

Originally posted by acludem
You have it backwards - the right wing hates individualism. They want conformity. Independent thought scares them. The right says "individualism" when what they really mean is selfishness. The right wants to expand massively the power of government to control thought, writing, music, and other mediums of art and communication. They seek programs like "Total Information Awareness" to smite individualism in favor of a totalitarian conformist state.

acludem

Your blood sugar level must be REALLY low. Control of thought and speech is a liberal thing. It wasn't conservatives who invented Politcally Correct speech - it was your buddies. It wasn't conservatives who foisted "hate" crime legislation on us - that was done by your pinko pals too.

 

[acludem]

Actually, to be completely accurate, and I think you will agree with me, there are extremists on both wings that are into thought control. The right-wing extremists just happen to be in control of the government right now.

acludem

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by acludem
Actually, to be completely accurate, and I think you will agree with me, there are extremists on both wings that are into thought control. The right-wing extremists just happen to be in control of the government right now.

acludem

No. You're wrong. Conservatives want free unencumbered political speech. Democrats blatantly censor rush on armed forces radio. You be the judge. And before you start in, Howard Sterns right to say "tits" on the radio is a decency issue. Stern's version of free speech is akin to yelling fire in a crowded theatre.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
No. You're wrong. Conservatives want free unencumbered political speech. Democrats blatantly censor rush on armed forces radio. You be the judge. And before you start in, Howard Sterns right to say "tits" on the radio is a decency issue. Stern's version of free speech is akin to yelling fire in a crowded theatre.

I hardly think that sterns mention of 'tits' on the radio is going to result in the possible trampling of people running out of a theater if an idiot yells fire.

 

[Merlin1047]

Originally posted by acludem
Actually, to be completely accurate, and I think you will agree with me, there are extremists on both wings that are into thought control. The right-wing extremists just happen to be in control of the government right now.

acludem

I suppose that from your ACLU perspective Pres. Bush is a right wing extremist.

From my perspective, he has socialist tendencies and not too many years ago he could have run as a Democrat.

 

[Merlin1047]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
In as much as family/traditional values teach personal responsibility, commitment, self-reliance and faith in god, they are anathema to the liberal agenda. For the libs to empower themselves through government, they need weak citizens, who can't take care of themselves. Responsible, successful people don't need government to the extent libs wish to push it down our throats. Therefore, libs try to do away with anything that makes people succesful without government help, like morals, and values.

There is some substantial basis for your assertion, but I believe you picked two topics so disparate that there is no logical means of tying the two together.

As you pointed out, the left needs a core constituency who depend on government. To that end, they design ever more entitlement programs. Unfortunately, in an ill-advised attempt to blunt the impact that the Democratic party acquires through these programs, Pres. Bush has attempted to emulate Democrats. This has succeeded in alienating his conservative support while failing to increase the support of the traditional Democrat voter base.

But to address the basic premise you presented. I'm not so sure that liberals "hate" values. Liberals, in their headlong rush to create a secular state, are currently engaged in a conscious process of driving religion out of the public sector and demonizing those who profess to adhere to Christianity. The reason that libs do this is because religion teaches values and morals in absolute and unequivocal terms. That flies in the face of "feel good about yourself" lib philosophy. Libs loathe those pesky Christians because libs are uncomfortable with biblical standards because these standards inconveniently criticize many of the people whom liberals count upon as part of their coalition. The mechanism is not unlike French opposition to our efforts in Iraq. The French opposed it because they had a vested interest in keeping Saddam in power.

To sum up, I believe that libs deride values because they know that if they imposed values or standards, their party would instantly fracture into dozens of splinter groups. This would cause the left wing to descend into total chaos (even worse than now). So the Democratic party has painted itself into a corner. They have wooed and won professional welfare recipients, homosexuals, the Hollyweird crowd, anarchists, illegals, socialists, communists, marxists, fascists and assorted nutcakes. And, horror of horrors, now they're stuck with them.