Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

What Does it Mean to Be a Liberal?Follow

#102 Aug 14 2012 at 4:31 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I just popped in for nostalgia's sake, and after sixty full seconds of skimming I can see that nothing has changed in the years I've been gone. Feels good. Carry on, Asylum. Carry on. Smiley: nod

Edit: Get.

Edited, Aug 14th 2012 3:32pm by Kachi
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#103 Aug 14 2012 at 4:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,874 posts
If you're buying stuff at a clearance sale, that's like STEALING from the poor defenceless job creators who own the factories. Are you a CRIMINAL?
____________________________
"Observe what happens when you force a man to change"
Just as Planned.
#104 Aug 14 2012 at 4:41 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
Technogeek wrote:
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
They look only at the fact that by spending X dollars on foodstamps, they can provide Y amount of food for people.
Heaven forbid that when gbaji can get new seat covers for his SUV.


Heaven forbid that my money be spent employing people who make and install seat covers when it could provide food for people who are unemployed because we taxed that money away instead. Kinda creating the problem we're trying to solve, aren't we?


Provided you want to make sure those sweat shop workers in China get plenty of work!


So the amount of money spent buying things in the US has no effect at all on employment in the US? Is that really your argument?


I just find this amusing because in one thread, I'm countering an argument that says that demand is the sole force that causes job creation, and here I'm being told that demand doesn't create jobs at all. Which is it?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#105 Aug 14 2012 at 4:43 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
OMFG! You were the one making the case that only demand creates jobs in the other thread! Holy f'ing cow man. You've got like multiple personality or something?

Edited, Aug 14th 2012 3:46pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#106 Aug 14 2012 at 4:54 PM Rating: Excellent
gbaji wrote:
Technogeek wrote:
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
They look only at the fact that by spending X dollars on foodstamps, they can provide Y amount of food for people.
Heaven forbid that when gbaji can get new seat covers for his SUV.


Heaven forbid that my money be spent employing people who make and install seat covers when it could provide food for people who are unemployed because we taxed that money away instead. Kinda creating the problem we're trying to solve, aren't we?


Provided you want to make sure those sweat shop workers in China get plenty of work!


So the amount of money spent buying things in the US has no effect at all on employment in the US? Is that really your argument?


I just find this amusing because in one thread, I'm countering an argument that says that demand is the sole force that causes job creation, and here I'm being told that demand doesn't create jobs at all. Which is it?


Because here I'm being snarky? I know such things are hard to see over the interweb machine, especially for you.
____________________________
Come on Bill, let's go home
[ffxisig]63311[/ffxisig]
#107 Aug 14 2012 at 5:50 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
They look only at the fact that by spending X dollars on foodstamps, they can provide Y amount of food for people.
Heaven forbid that when gbaji can get new seat covers for his SUV.


Heaven forbid that my money be spent employing people who make and install seat covers when it could provide food for people who are unemployed because we taxed that money away instead. Kinda creating the problem we're trying to solve, aren't we?

Well, if you're so worried about those unemployed seat-cover makers in Bangladesh, sure.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#108 Aug 14 2012 at 5:55 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,157 posts
I've never seen seat covers that were so complicated that you would need to pay someone else to install them for you. Job creation is still job creation, though. No matter how hilariously mechanically inept the client is.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#109 Aug 14 2012 at 7:07 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
Technogeek wrote:
Because here I'm being snarky? I know such things are hard to see over the interweb machine, especially for you.


Oh, I got that you were being snarky. The question is: do *you* get that this is a joke answer and not one we should base actual economic decisions on? See, the joke would be a lot more funny if you weren't serious about raising taxes on rich people because you believe that when they spend their money making stuff, it doesn't benefit anyone, and when they spend their money buying stuff, it doesn't benefit anyone either. So... Um... joke on you?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#110 Aug 15 2012 at 7:46 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,157 posts
gbaji wrote:
See, the joke would be a lot more funny if
Foul on the play. One requires a sense of humor before being able to give suggestions on the improvement of a joke. Ten yard penalty.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#111 Aug 15 2012 at 10:25 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,790 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
See, the joke would be a lot more funny if
Foul on the play. One requires a sense of humor before being able to give suggestions on the improvement of a joke. Ten yard penalty.


Gbaji doesn't have a sense of humor?

You have read a lot of his posts, right?
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#112 Aug 15 2012 at 10:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,426 posts
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
You have read a lot of his posts, right?


Smiley: dubious



____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#113 Aug 15 2012 at 10:36 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,157 posts
I've seen people fall down stairs, too. I don't think they're the next Richard Pryor.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#114 Aug 15 2012 at 10:43 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,790 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
You have read a lot of his posts, right?


Smiley: dubious





How else do you explain some of the stuff he posts. It takes him so long to reply because he has to take 10 minutes to stop laughing after every sentence he types.
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#115 Aug 15 2012 at 11:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,426 posts
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
How else do you explain some of the stuff he posts.


The fog of information can drive out knowledge.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#116 Aug 15 2012 at 1:46 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,790 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
How else do you explain some of the stuff he posts.


The fog of information can drive out knowledge.


Until proven otherwise, I'm going with the "gbaji is a long-game, elaborate troll" theory.
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#117 Aug 15 2012 at 2:00 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,041 posts
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
You have read a lot of his posts, right?


Smiley: dubious





How else do you explain some of the stuff he posts. It takes him so long to reply because he has to take 10 minutes to stop laughing after every sentence he types.


10,000 monkeys typing on 10,000 keyboards, etc.
#118 Aug 15 2012 at 2:17 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
#119 Aug 15 2012 at 2:29 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts


I'm convinced that person is a poster here and was writing on the subject of Gbaji.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#120 Aug 15 2012 at 5:28 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,552 posts

Also, here's one about why Conservatives have a sort of "required reading" that Liberals haven't had for several generations.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2012/08/paul_ryan_and_ayn_rand_why_don_t_america_liberals_have_their_own_canon_of_writers_and_thinkers_.single.html

____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#121 Aug 15 2012 at 7:40 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts


It's interesting, I suppose. In the way that all pseudo-intellectual garbage written in the hope that most people won't really think too hard about it is. Not the first time I've heard this, and it's not really gained any ground since then. The problem is that while modern liberals latch onto the idea of the veil of ignorance, they don't actually practice it in any meaningful way. Worse, they actually do the opposite, but claim that they're not. When they ask people to think of the rules they should have if they didn't know what their condition would be, what they're really doing is asking what rules people think they should follow if they were the most downtrodden members of society. It's not a veil of ignorance, but a veil of poverty.

Even the example the author provides illustrates this. The NFL rule of giving the first draft pick to the team with the worst record last year isn't based on not knowing what your win/loss record might be, but supposing that if you came in last place. The question asked is "if you were the worst team in the league, wouldn't you want/need the best pick in the draft to offset that?". Similarly, liberal social policy doesn't at all ask "what if you had no idea how you'd turn out?", but "what if you turned out poor?". They mask this with the concept that since you don't know what your fortunes will be, you should imagine that they could be really bad, but that's really not any different at all than what the author accuses conservatives of doing (just in reverse).


Interestingly enough, the whole "veil of opulence" idea appears to stop right at the edge of liberal projection. Liberals project the idea that we should set up rules assuming we might be the poorest, sickest, and most disadvantaged within society, so they project the opposite onto conservatives. But again, the examples used are telling. In the first (regarding tax policy), the author speculates a question he thinks conservatives are asking, but I've never once in my life heard a conservative argue against higher taxes on the rich by asking people to imagine how they'd like to pay those taxes if they were rich themselves. We use lots of arguments against such things, but not that one. On the flip side though, is the quote by Obama basically making exactly the "veil of poverty" argument. Obama makes it about poor people paying more so that rich people pay less. Not exactly the veil of ignorance that he should be espousing, it is?

And in the second example, he talks about health care, and gives a decent example of a conservative justice asking how you'd feel if you were in group X having to pay for group Y. But let's not forget that this is in response to a law which targets group X to pay for group Y. The principle behind it is *not* about the veil of ignorance at all.


I think the fundamental problem with the whole subject is that in order to really utilize the concept of a veil of ignorance, you would have to imagine objectively how each group of people in society might be affected by a given law. This means imagining you were in group A, and asking "is this fair to group A", then imagining you're in group B and doing the same, then group C, group D, etc, and then coming up with a rule that is most fair to the whole. The concept fails because ultimately it requires that you judge each groups gains and losses. And while that might be legitimate, it's *not* how most liberals make social decisions anyway, so using it as some kind of yardstick against conservatives seems somewhat pointless. Not to mention, even if you can ignore your own place in society, you're still effectively picking which groups you like versus those you don't. It's strange that the author assumes that conservatives can't possibly be unbiased in that choices, while presumably assuming that liberals can. I think that's his own self delusion.


Um... This is also where I point out that conservative ideology already incorporates this concept, and far more honestly and consistently than the left's does. Instead of a "veil of ignorance", conservatives use a methodology I've pointed out repeatedly in the past (in this thread in fact): We identify actions which cause harm to others, and create a set of rules that limits it. Of course, to do this, you must be able to differentiate between an act which harms someone and failing to act to help that person. So while a liberal will ask "What tax policy would you want if you were poor", and conclude that we should have high taxes on the wealthy to pay for benefits for the poor, conservatives do *not* ask the opposite question (despite the authors claim). We ask "what tax policy will generate funding for the things that government must do, while negatively impacting all tax payers the least?". It's also why we fight for smaller government. We realize that every time government is expanded, it requires additional harm be done to someone to pay for it.


IMO, a lot of liberal intellectuals would really do well for themselves if they'd abandon the assumption that conservatives are just liberals who hold the opposite positions on most things. We're not. We view some pretty basic concepts about society differently, and thus arrive at different solutions than liberals. We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor". But liberals assume that since they think in terms of helping the poor at the expense of the rich, that if conservatives oppose them it must be because they want to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor (pretty much exactly Obama's words btw). But that is simply flat out wrong. We oppose such things because we oppose in general the concept of government deciding after the fact that it should adjust people's outcomes. Because at the end of the day isn't the best set of rules consistent with the veil of ignorance going to be those which don't reward *any* group at the expense of another? A government that doesn't pay attention to whether you are rich or poor should be the correct answer if you honestly answer that question. But, as we all know, that's *not* the answer the left gives. Interestingly enough, it *is* the answer that the right gives.


Veil of ignorance indeed. Perhaps the author should lift his off his own head first.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#122 Aug 15 2012 at 7:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
It's interesting, I suppose. In the way that all pseudo-intellectual garbage written in the hope that most people won't really think too hard about it is.

You'd certainly know.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#123 Aug 15 2012 at 7:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".


No, you think of "me" rather than "we".
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#124 Aug 15 2012 at 10:33 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,601 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".


No, you think of "me" rather than "we".


That would be "I" not "me" though, right?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#125 Aug 16 2012 at 6:25 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,157 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
It's interesting, I suppose. In the way that all pseudo-intellectual garbage written in the hope that most people won't really think too hard about it is.
You'd certainly know.
He's hoping that you won't think too hard about it.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#126 Aug 16 2012 at 4:52 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".


No, you think of "me" rather than "we".


That would be "I" not "me" though, right?


There is no "I" in "me".
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#127 Aug 16 2012 at 4:57 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,524 posts
gbaji wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".


No, you think of "me" rather than "we".


That would be "I" not "me" though, right?


There is no "I" in "me".
Who?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#128 Aug 16 2012 at 5:37 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".


No, you think of "me" rather than "we".


That would be "I" not "me" though, right?


There is no "I" in "me".
Who?


What?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#129 Aug 16 2012 at 9:54 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".


No, you think of "me" rather than "we".


That would be "I" not "me" though, right?


There is no "I" in "me".
Who?


What?

Wint
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
I'm smarter then you. I know how to think. I've been trained in critical thinking instead of blindly parroting what I've been told.

#130 Aug 17 2012 at 7:41 AM Rating: Good
******
43,157 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".
No, you think of "me" rather than "we".
That would be "I" not "me" though, right?
There is no "I" in "me".
Who?
What?
Wint
McCloud!
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#131 Aug 17 2012 at 8:17 AM Rating: Good
lolgaxe wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".
No, you think of "me" rather than "we".
That would be "I" not "me" though, right?
There is no "I" in "me".
Who?
What?
Wint
McCloud!
There ya go!
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
I'm smarter then you. I know how to think. I've been trained in critical thinking instead of blindly parroting what I've been told.

#132 Aug 17 2012 at 10:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,277 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We don't think in terms of "rich versus poor".
No, you think of "me" rather than "we".
That would be "I" not "me" though, right?
There is no "I" in "me".
Who?
What?
Wint
McCloud!

#133 Aug 20 2012 at 7:43 AM Rating: Good
******
43,157 posts
They should have used more than one episode of MST3k for that compilation. Smiley: frown

Edit: Need more MST3k.


Edited, Aug 20th 2012 12:27pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#135 Sep 09 2012 at 11:27 AM Rating: Good
<Attenburough>And here we see the elusive sockus stinkerii, who's origin in currently unknown.</Attenburough>

Edited, Sep 9th 2012 11:29am by Bijou
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
I'm smarter then you. I know how to think. I've been trained in critical thinking instead of blindly parroting what I've been told.

#137 Sep 09 2012 at 11:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Were it not for your capacity to spell, and string out a coherent thought you sound identical to certain (banned?) posters here.

New? Ok. Welcome to the machine I guess.

EDIT: Changed to plural

Edited, Sep 9th 2012 11:44am by Bijou
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
I'm smarter then you. I know how to think. I've been trained in critical thinking instead of blindly parroting what I've been told.

#138 Sep 09 2012 at 11:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,075 posts
A newbie posting his first posts in the Asylum?

This will end well.

Smiley: popcorn
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and the League of Extraordinary Crafters
#139 Sep 09 2012 at 1:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,874 posts
Ahh.... Fresh meat.
____________________________
"Observe what happens when you force a man to change"
Just as Planned.
#140 Sep 09 2012 at 1:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'm sure he'll follow the same arc as all the other short-term election time posters.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#141 Sep 09 2012 at 4:42 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Were it not for your capacity to spell, and string out a coherent thought you sound identical to certain (banned?) posters here.

New? Ok. Welcome to the machine I guess.

If he's not a sock, then he found someone's script somewhere, because it's all the same old lines.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#143 Sep 09 2012 at 8:29 PM Rating: Good
Quote:

Well the first part of my post is quite literally the definition they teach us in political science class at my college; though personally I think that is giving the liberals too much credit. A short, sweet, and to the point definition of liberalism would be: stealth totalitarianism.


Smiley: tinfoilhat
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#144 Sep 09 2012 at 8:32 PM Rating: Good
**
574 posts
Go go gadget tin foil hat.

crap couple mins to slow.

Edited, Sep 9th 2012 10:36pm by RavennofTitan
____________________________
.
#145 Sep 09 2012 at 8:33 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,041 posts
SwaziSpring wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
Were it not for your capacity to spell, and string out a coherent thought you sound identical to certain (banned?) posters here.

New? Ok. Welcome to the machine I guess.

If he's not a sock, then he found someone's script somewhere, because it's all the same old lines.

Well the first part of my post is quite literally the definition they teach us in political science class at my college; though personally I think that is giving the liberals too much credit. A short, sweet, and to the point definition of liberalism would be: stealth totalitarianism.

Edited, Sep 9th 2012 10:26pm by SwaziSpring


Just out of curiosity, what prestigous university might you be attending?

Edited, Sep 9th 2012 9:35pm by Guenny
#146 Sep 09 2012 at 8:38 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,524 posts
SwaziSpring wrote:

A short, sweet, and to the point definition of liberalism would be: stealth totalitarianism.


I bet you almost believed you were posting here of your own free will. You're too smart to fall for that though.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#147 Sep 09 2012 at 8:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
He's attending Rasmussen University!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#148 Sep 09 2012 at 8:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,133 posts
Quote:
Well the first part of my post is quite literally the definition they teach us in political science class at my college;


I'm dubious. Can you cite the name and publisher of the book you used?

Quote:
though personally I think that is giving the liberals too much credit.


Well, as long as you're keeping an open mind.

Quote:
A short, sweet, and to the point definition of liberalism would be: stealth totalitarianism.


As opposed to stealth oligarchy or stealth theocracy. Of course.

I think it is fair to say that liberals tend to look to the government for solutions in more scenarios than do conservatives. I think that the perception that liberals just love big government is a deliberate misinterpretation meant to impugn. I could just as easily assert that all conservatives just love big military and big religion; but I don't believe that's true.

Sadly, much of the political discourse in the current climate is bereft of nuance.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#149 Sep 09 2012 at 9:58 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
SwaziSpring wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
Were it not for your capacity to spell, and string out a coherent thought you sound identical to certain (banned?) posters here.

New? Ok. Welcome to the machine I guess.

If he's not a sock, then he found someone's script somewhere, because it's all the same old lines.

Well the first part of my post is quite literally the definition they teach us in political science class at my college; though personally I think that is giving the liberals too much credit. A short, sweet, and to the point definition of liberalism would be: stealth totalitarianism.

Edited, Sep 9th 2012 10:26pm by SwaziSpring


Smiley: snore
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#150 Sep 09 2012 at 10:17 PM Rating: Good
Samira wrote:
As opposed to stealth oligarchy or stealth theocracy. Of course.

I think it is fair to say that liberals tend to look to the government for solutions in more scenarios than do conservatives. I think that the perception that liberals just love big government is a deliberate misinterpretation meant to impugn. I could just as easily assert that all conservatives just love big military and big religion; but I don't believe that's true.

Sadly, much of the political discourse in the current climate is bereft of nuance.


Whore!

/irony off
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#151 Sep 09 2012 at 10:23 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
Jophiel wrote:
He's attending Rasmussen University!

I was thinking Phoenix. Or, the Western Sonoma University and Burrito Palace.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 59 All times are in CDT