NationStates Jolt Archive

I see this term - meant generally to be an insult - thrown around at me whenever I express certain ideas around certain posters.

For example, to some posters, if I suggest that Islam is not an evil, barbaric ideology - I'm a liberal.

To others, if I suggest that Bush is maybe not the greatest president in the history of the world - I'm a liberal.

To still others, if I suggest that occupying Iraq is not a good idea - I'm a liberal.

I've tried, time and again, to get out of this pigeonhole that I'm supposed to be in. But I can see it's futile. Repeat something often enough, and it becomes true!*

So yeah, I'm a liberal. I admit it. Here's my definition though - something more concrete and not based purely on whether I disagree with your stance.

favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

So, fire away. Criticize me for my evil preference for individual freedom. I can take it. :)

*Or totally meaningless. Whichever.

You're not a liberal on all issues. Hell, I'm probably as liberal as you overall. You're liberal where it counts -- where you let personal "freedoms" get in the way of what's best for the country as a whole, and the world as a whole for that matter. I usually use the term "liberal" to denote somebody whose ideas of personal freedom are taken to egregious extremes where many things are sacrificed to maintain such a level of liberty.

So, fire away. Criticize me for my evil preference for individual freedom. I can take it. :)

*Or totally meaningless. Whichever.I disapprove of liberals somewhat. They're too much into letting companies do as they please for my taste.

Begoner21;11686625']You're not a liberal on all issues. Hell, I'm probably as liberal as you overall. You're liberal where it counts -- where you let personal "freedoms" get in the way of what's best for the country as a whole, and the world as a whole for that matter. I usually use the term "liberal" to denote somebody whose ideas of personal freedom are taken to egregious extremes where many things are sacrificed to maintain such a level of liberty.

I remember another party who felt just as you do. The National Socialist also felt that personal liberty shouldn't come before the good of the state. [/GODWIN]

I remember another party who felt just as you do. The National Socialist also felt that personal liberty shouldn't come before the good of the state. [/GODWIN]

Ah, yes, the typical liberal recourse -- the invokation of the conservative-Hitler comparison. So predictable. Do liberals actually have a playbook, or do they all just think alike?

I suppose believing that there isn't a terrorist hiding behind every tree makes me a liberal?

The paranoid and the oppressive throw that term "liberal" out when they don't get to control our lives.

A handbook, matching t-shirts and an annual fancy dress party. Being part of the liberal conspiracy has perks:cool:

Begoner21;11686704']Ah, yes, the typical liberal recourse -- the invokation of the conservative-Hitler comparison. So predictable. Do liberals actually have a playbook, or do they all just think alike?

Think being the operative word in that question. Seeing information, analysing it and then coming to the same conclusion as someone else who has similar beliefs as you is nothing to be ashamed of. Simply spewing forth the views of the GOP without even trying to come up with your own ideas is something to be ashamed off.

A handbook, matching t-shirts and an annual fancy dress party. Being part of the liberal conspiracy has perks:cool:
OTOH the Zionist Conspiracy members also get an annual ball - we should have some kind of Liberal Disco.

OTOH the Zionist Conspiracy members also get an annual ball - we should have some kind of Liberal Disco.

Nah, it'll end up like those school discos where the boys school invites the girls school so they can dance together and they end up standing on opposite side of the hall trying to catch each others eye and the atmosphere sucks.

A handbook, matching t-shirts and an annual fancy dress party. Being part of the liberal conspiracy has perks:cool:

Ah, I knew there was a reason so many people were clamoring to join the Democrat Party.

A handbook, matching t-shirts and an annual fancy dress party. Being part of the liberal conspiracy has perks:cool:

And knish, don't forget the knish. ;)

Nah, it'll end up like those school discos where the boys school invites the girls school so they can dance together and they end up standing on opposite side of the hall trying to catch each others eye and the atmosphere sucks.
Nah, us socialists love to dance with members of the opposite sex all night long, and also do some robot dancing too (might just be talking about myself here, mind...).

*edits*

Urmm yes, and a knish also.

Nah, us socialists love to dance with members of the opposite sex all night long, and also do some robot dancing too (might just be talking about myself here, mind...).

*edits*

Urmm yes, and a knish also.

Oh don't get me wrong, I loved to dance with the opposite sex too. It's just hard to attract positive attention from the opposite sex when you start balding at 14.

Begoner21;11686625']You're not a liberal on all issues. Hell, I'm probably as liberal as you overall. You're liberal where it counts -- where you let personal "freedoms" get in the way of what's best for the country as a whole, and the world as a whole for that matter. I usually use the term "liberal" to denote somebody whose ideas of personal freedom are taken to egregious extremes where many things are sacrificed to maintain such a level of liberty.

Define "egregious extremes." And putting state authority above civil rights is a trait found in dictatorial countries, not free ones. And who is to decide "what's best for the country as a whole?"

Oh don't get me wrong, I loved to dance with the opposite sex too. It's just hard to attract positive attention from the opposite sex when you start balding at 14.
Pah, 'tis easy enough if you are polite and know what you're doing.

*boogeys with some females in a too-legit-to-quit style*

Seeing information, analysing it and then coming to the same conclusion as someone else who has similar beliefs as you is nothing to be ashamed of.

Funny. I apply the same formula, yet my views conform more closely, if not almost identically, with the GOP. I do not disagree with your quoted statement -- however, I think that liberals simply gobble down propaganda unquestioningly; analyzing information tends to lead to at least slightly different conclusions among different people. Nonetheless, 99% of self-identified liberals are for withdrawal from Iraq. Such groupthink is unhealthy.

Begoner21;11686789']Funny. I apply the same formula, yet my views conform more closely, if not almost identically, with the GOP. I do not disagree with your quoted statement -- however, I think that liberals simply gobble down propaganda unquestioningly; analyzing information tends to lead to at least slightly different conclusions among different people. Nonetheless, 99% of self-identified liberals are for withdrawal from Iraq. Such groupthink is unhealthy.

Like you don't? :rolleyes:

Pah, 'tis easy enough if you are polite and know what you're doing.

*boogeys with some females in a too-legit-to-quit style*

If only I'd had you around to guide me during my mispent youth ;) .

You have no idea how much respect I'd have for you if you actually have females boogieing with you in any style while you post on NSG.

Define "egregious extremes." And putting state authority above civil rights is a trait found in dictatorial countries, not free ones. And who is to decide "what's best for the country as a whole?"

One of Hitler's traits is black hair. Does that mean that all black-haired people are somehow associated with Hitler? Should we arrest all Asians immediately? One of the few good things about dictatorships is a general lack of crime. By "egregious extremes," I am referring to such ideas as complete privacy, even if it interferes with a police investigation.

Like you don't? :rolleyes:

No, I usually question it and then find that I agree with it.

Begoner21;11686789']Funny. I apply the same formula, yet my views conform more closely, if not almost identically, with the GOP. I do not disagree with your quoted statement -- however, I think that liberals simply gobble down propaganda unquestioningly; analyzing information tends to lead to at least slightly different conclusions among different people. Nonetheless, 99% of self-identified liberals are for withdrawal from Iraq. Such groupthink is unhealthy.

Hang on, I identify myself as liberal, a proper liberal mind not your USian watered down center right liberal and I don't think that a withdrawal from Iraq is a good idea. We made the mess and now we have to fix it. Most of my friends are of a similar political alignment as me and they think along the same lines.

I feel compelled to ask where you are getting the 99% of liberals want a withdrawal statistic from?

If only I'd had you around to guide me during my mispent youth ;) .
Mine's been pretty misspent also, just in a different way I'd imagine.
You have no idea how much respect I'd have for you if you actually have females boogieing with you in any style while you post on NSG.
If only I had a mini-USB to transfer pictures from my phone to my PC, then :(

Bah, I shall sort this out in the near future and shall post you some pics of me doing my thing whilst posting on NSG.

Mine's been pretty misspent also, just in a different way I'd imagine.

It's ok, I hit uni and more than made up for it.

If only I had a mini-USB to transfer pictures from my phone to my PC, then :(

Bah, I shall sort this out in the near future and shall post you some pics of me doing my thing whilst posting on NSG.

Seriously dude, you'd become something of a godlike figure to me. I might even nominate you for NSG pope.

I feel compelled to ask where you are getting the 99% of liberals want a withdrawal statistic from?

I heard on the radio, some sort of talk show -- I'm afraid I don't have a source. It is possible that I am horribly mistaken, though.

Begoner21;11686819']I heard on the radio, some sort of talk show -- I'm afraid I don't have a source. It is possible that I am horribly mistaken, though.
Just possibly ;)

Begoner21;11686789']Nonetheless, 99% of self-identified liberals are for withdrawal from Iraq. Such groupthink is unhealthy.

Wait, since people came to the same conclusion, that means that they are not thinking? How the hell does that make any sense?

Hang on, I identify myself as liberal, a proper liberal mind not your USian watered down center right liberal and I don't think that a withdrawal from Iraq is a good idea. We made the mess and now we have to fix it. Most of my friends are of a similar political alignment as me and they think along the same lines.

USA liberals are "watered down"? That only means that the rest of the world (read, Europe) is crazier than American liberals. Look at the situation in almost all of Europe -- a rotten, stagnating economy combined with all sorts of Muslim immigration and assimilation problems. Look at the French protests. Liberals, in general, in the US believe what they wish was true instead of what is actually the case. They want to spend more money on welfare, raise the minimum wage, have peace with everybody, etc. Sure, that would be good if it were possible, but it's never going to happen.

Just possibly ;)

Eh, maybe my vehement dislike of most liberals precluded my judgment, but I'm almost certain that that was in fact the statistic cited.

Begoner21;11686829']USA liberals are "watered down"? That only means that the rest of the world (read, Europe) is crazier than American liberals. Look at the situation in almost all of Europe -- a rotten, stagnating economy combined with all sorts of Muslim immigration and assimilation problems. Look at the French protests. Liberals, in general, in the US believe what they wish was true instead of what is actually the case. They want to spend more money on welfare, raise the minimum wage, have peace with everybody, etc. Sure, that would be good if it were possible, but it's never going to happen.

Yes, Europes economy has imploded and we all now live in card board boxes. The evil muslims are bombing us everyday and are just about to become the leaders of all our countries.

You really need to stop watching fox news and listening to everything the conservative asshats in the US say.

Yes, Europes economy has imploded and we all now live in card board boxes. The evil muslims are bombing us everyday and are just about to become the leaders of all our countries.

You really need to stop watching fox news and listening to everything the conservative asshats in the US say.

Well apparently the riots in France were evidence enough that the muslims are after you. Because of that we should trash the Geneva Convention and go after them all because everyone "knows" that they hate freedom.

Begoner21;11686829']USA liberals are "watered down"? That only means that the rest of the world (read, Europe) is crazier than American liberals.
Or more right-thinking, it entirely depends on how you think about it.
Look at the situation in almost all of Europe -- a rotten, stagnating economy combined with all sorts of Muslim immigration and assimilation problems.
Ah yeah... that'd be it... it's not flourishing, and predicted to have superior long-term growth compared to the US at all...

And what's wrong with Muslims and indeed multiculturalism?
Look at the French protests.
I blinked and missed them...

They lasted about a week...
Liberals, in general, in the US believe what they wish was true instead of what is actually the case. They want to spend more money on welfare, raise the minimum wage, have peace with everybody, etc. Sure, that would be good if it were possible, but it's never going to happen.
It's only not going to happen if conservatives are staying in power. Sadly, the Democrats are about as left-wing as the UK Conservatives at the moment (as in pretty right-wing), so the chances of this happening are slim to nil.

Begoner21;11686834']Eh, maybe my vehement dislike of most liberals precluded my judgment, but I'm almost certain that that was in fact the statistic cited.
It might be an element of the source's dislike also...

Yes, Europes economy has imploded and we all now live in card board boxes. The evil muslims are bombing us everyday and are just about to become the leaders of all our countries.

Yes, pretty much. The socialist European system is a failure. France, Italy, Great Britain and Germany have a lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states in the United States. Here's an excellent report on the European problem (no, not from FOX):

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf

Just one quick look at the included graphs tells you all you need to know.

Well apparently the riots in France were evidence enough that the muslims are after you. Because of that we should trash the Geneva Convention and go after them all because everyone "knows" that they hate freedom.

Ahh, riots in a country notorious for civil disobedience and work related protests are the evidence that we should start glassing middle eastern countries.

I don't know why no-one told me this before, I've been deluding myself for years.

Sadly, the Democrats are about as left-wing as the UK Conservatives at the moment (as in pretty right-wing), so the chances of this happening are slim to nil.

Sadly, the Democrats are about as right-wing as the former Communist Party in the USSR. Needless to say, they're pretty damn left-wing.

Ahh, riots in a country notorious for civil disobedience and work related protests are the evidence that we should start glassing middle eastern countries.

No, it's proof that the European experiment has failed and it needs to be replaced by the free market.

Begoner21;11686879']Yes, pretty much. The socialist European system is a failure. France, Italy, Great Britain and Germany have a lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states in the United States. Here's an excellent report on the European problem (no, not from FOX):

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf

Just one quick look at the included graphs tells you all you need to know.
On the other hand, the lowest 40% of people own more than 20% of the wealth in Europe...

There is more "middle ground" in the EU than in the US - there is amazing income disparity in the US compared to here - your top 1% own about 20% of the wealth - ours own about 10% IIRC.

I'd rather live in a fair society than one in which the poor are shitted upon from a great height by the rich.

Begoner21;11686888']Sadly, the Democrats are about as right-wing as the former Communist Party in the USSR. Needless to say, they're pretty damn left-wing.
Hahahahaha teeeheeheehee!

No it isn't at all!

Begoner21;11686888']Sadly, the Democrats are about as right-wing as the former Communist Party in the USSR. Needless to say, they're pretty damn left-wing.

See this is where most American right wingers expose their complete lack of knowledge of world politics. To call a Democrate liberal or left wing is a joke to the rest of the world. Post-McCarthy US has never been exposed to left wing politics.

For example, to some posters, if I suggest that Islam is not an evil, barbaric ideology - I'm a liberal.



I've tried, time and again, to get out of this pigeonhole that I'm supposed to be in. But I can see it's futile. Repeat something often enough, and it becomes true!*

So yeah, I'm a liberal. I admit it. Here's my definition though - something more concrete and not based purely on whether I disagree with your stance.

So, fire away. Criticize me for my evil preference for individual freedom. I can take it. :)

*Or totally meaningless. Whichever.


Islam is not a barbaric religion. I've read the Koran. I saw nothing about killing any human being. It's just that some people twist the teachings as to imply that they mean to kill people.

See this is where most American right wingers expose their complete lack of knowledge of world politics. To call a Democrate liberal or left wing is a joke to the rest of the world. Post-McCarthy US has never been exposed to left wing politics.

Yeah, redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor isn't communistic at all. If it was up to Democrats like Hillary, everybody would earn the same amount as everybody else after taxation.

Begoner21;11686890']No, it's proof that the European experiment has failed and it needs to be replaced by the free market.

The free market exsists in Europe. Please name one nationalised industry in the UK.

Islam is not a barbaric religion. I've read the Koran. I saw nothing about killing any human being. It's just that some people twist the teachings as to imply that they mean to kill people.
Yes, exactly.

It's written in a language which almost nobody speaks any more (ancient Arabic), so anyone who's in the mood for spreading just about anything has a carte blanche to do so.

On the other hand, the lowest 40% of people own more than 20% of the wealth in Europe...


Would you rather have a big slice of a small pie, or a small slice of a bigger and ever-growing pie? I'd take the big pie any day of the week.

Begoner21;11686908']Yeah, redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor isn't communistic at all. If it was up to Democrats like Hillary, everybody would earn the same amount as everybody else after taxation.

So you want to completely remove all welfare?

Begoner21;11686704']Ah, yes, the typical liberal recourse -- the invokation of the conservative-Hitler comparison. So predictable. Do liberals actually have a playbook, or do they all just think alike?

Ah yes, the typical conservative recourse -- the claim of the liberal being nasty. So predictable. Do Conservatives ever stop playing the abused victim, or do they all just think alike?

The free market exsists in Europe. Please name one nationalised industry in the UK.

The governmnet. Namely, the various government systems that force people to subsidize sundry industries and take money from the successful and hand it to the unsuccessful and drug addicts.

So you want to completely remove all welfare?

I want to make people work for their money and not go out and buy drugs and alcohol with the money I earn. Debtor's prison wasn't that bad of an idea -- it simply needs to be modernized.

Begoner21;11686922']The governmnet. Namely, the various government systems that force people to subsidize various industries and take money from the successful and hand it to the unsuccessful and drug addicts.

But you have that in the US, you have money for jobless people and you sure as hell have government subsidies for businesses.

Begoner21;11686908']Yeah, redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor isn't communistic at all. If it was up to Democrats like Hillary, everybody would earn the same amount as everybody else after taxation.
http://files.lussumo.com/stupid.jpg

No, you're just totally wrong.

Wealth redistribution under the Democrats would simply put higher taxes on the wealthy and the middle class - not make everyone equal in the slightest, simply increase taxes by a couple of percent.

Begoner21;11686927']I want to make people work for their money and not go out and buy drugs and alcohol with the money I earn. Debtor's prison wasn't that bad of an idea -- it simply needs to be modernized.
Yes, let's make being poor illegal. Nice one.

But you have that in the US, you have money for jobless people and you sure as hell have government subsidies for businesses.

I don't like that either. Nonetheless, it is not so pervasive as it is in Europe, with its miscellaneous anti-business politics.

Begoner21;11686944']I don't like that either. Nonetheless, it is not so pervasive as it is in Europe, with it's miscellaneous anti-business politics.

You sir haven't the first clue what you are talking about. You really need to read more.

Begoner21;11686888']Sadly, the Democrats are about as right-wing as the former Communist Party in the USSR. Needless to say, they're pretty damn left-wing.

ROFLMGDFAO

Begoner21;11686625']You're not a liberal on all issues. Hell, I'm probably as liberal as you overall.

I see, so when you talk about "typical liberal behaviour," you are really describing yourself? I think not unless you really like to stereotype yourself.

You're liberal where it counts -- where you let personal "freedoms" get in the way of what's best for the country as a whole, and the world as a whole for that matter.

What's with the "quotes" around the "word" freedom?

As for what's best for the country as a whole, I think that's just a matter of personal disagreement. You think invading and occupying Iraq is best for our country. I don't.

I usually use the term "liberal" to denote somebody whose ideas of personal freedom are taken to egregious extremes where many things are sacrificed to maintain such a level of liberty.

Like what's sacrificed? Right to privacy, free speech, freedom of religion? I don't sacrifice those things if I can help it, but I think a case could be made that the "non liberals" do.

The problem with this kind of thing - especially when trying to describe behaviour and psychological traits supposedly shared by all "liberals" (or all whatevers) - is that the definition is so vague as to be generally meaningless. It's useful as an insult or a platitude.

For example, socialists and communists are called "liberal." As well as libertarian capitalists. When a single word means "black" as well as "white," that word is probably not a good word to use when you're referring to either colour.

That's my main issue with the pundit-style spewage of "liberals" or "neocons." Usually in America, these are barely euphemisms for "Democrats" and "Republicans," but I think there's a tendency to shy away from just saying that for fear of looking like a party hack.

Liberals, in general, in the US believe what they wish was true instead of what is actually the case. They want to spend more money on welfare, raise the minimum wage, have peace with everybody, etc.

Oh! Guess I'm not a liberal at all then. I'll change the title of the thread... I must be a conservative. ;)

Begoner21;11686888']Sadly, the Democrats are about as right-wing as the former Communist Party in the USSR. Needless to say, they're pretty damn left-wing.

Unfortunatly, America is the land of the centre-right battling it out with the whacko-right.

You obviously know nothing of socialism in any of it's forms to confuse the Democrats with a communist party. Other then a couple of mild social democrats, the left is ignored in the US, while the right and far right rant against each other over who loves America more and who's going to give better benefits to corporations. Only, they don't always mention that last part to the voters.

There are some far-leftists in the U.S., but certainly none that hold any political office. The only person in Congress that can credibly be described as anywhere close to left-leaning is Bernie Sanders.

Begoner21;11686704']Ah, yes, the typical liberal recourse -- the invokation of the conservative-Hitler comparison. So predictable. Do liberals actually have a playbook, or do they all just think alike?

No, it's conservatives that all use the same rhetoric. It's called "talking points."

The reason you get accused of being a fascist is because you favor fascist politics.

There are some far-leftists in the U.S., but certainly none that hold any political office. The only person in Congress that can credibly be described as anywhere close to left-leaning is Bernie Sanders.

And if memory serves he was a Republican until he got so disgusted with how corrupt they had become.

There are some real liberals in Congress though.

Dennis Kucinich (http://kucinich.house.gov/) for one.

Begoner21;11686888']Sadly, the Democrats are about as right-wing as the former Communist Party in the USSR. Needless to say, they're pretty damn left-wing.

They sure are. If they gain a majority in Congress, it's only a matter of time before they start nationalizing industries, collectivizing agriculture, setting up gulags, and launching purges. Oh, and unveiling hammer and sickle flags and calling each other "comrade." :rolleyes:

Ah yes, the typical conservative recourse -- the claim of the liberal being nasty. So predictable. Do Conservatives ever stop playing the abused victim, or do they all just think alike?

One's like Begoner don't think. They parrot. The guy said within the last couple of hours that FOX news us unbiased.

And if memory serves he was a Republican until he got so disgusted with how corrupt they had become.

There are some real liberals in Congress though.

Dennis Kucinich (http://kucinich.house.gov/) for one.

True enough, but he's not nearly as leftist as [NS:]Begoner21 would have us believe.

One's like Begoner don't think. They parrot. The guy said within the last couple of hours that FOX news us unbiased.

*chuckles*

Begoner21;11686908']Yeah, redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor isn't communistic at all.

No, actually it isn't. It's left-wing, but it isn't communistic. Communism has far more radical proposals.

If it was up to Democrats like Hillary, everybody would earn the same amount as everybody else after taxation.

Why do you think so?

I continually find it amazing that liberals seem to take the word 'Liberal' as an insult? I'm not insulted to be called conservative. Why should they feel like they have been slandered when they are identified with their political philosophy?

Begoner21;11686625']You're not a liberal on all issues. Hell, I'm probably as liberal as you overall. You're liberal where it counts -- where you let personal "freedoms" get in the way of what's best for the country as a whole, and the world as a whole for that matter. I usually use the term "liberal" to denote somebody whose ideas of personal freedom are taken to egregious extremes where many things are sacrificed to maintain such a level of liberty.
Let me assure you that you are not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. :D

I continually find it amazing that liberals seem to take the word 'Liberal' as an insult? I'm not insulted to be called conservative. Why should they feel like they have been slandered when they are identified with their political philosophy?

When people use "liberal" and obviously mean it to mean "terrorist-sympathizing, Democrat, welfare-nanny-lovin' Clintonite," it does NOT refer to my political philosophy. It's inaccurate a term at best, and when used by "non liberals" in arguments to describe "typical behaviour" on part of "liberals," it IS meant as an insult.

Deny it if you wish, you neocon fascist. ;)

When people use "liberal" and obviously mean it to mean "terrorist-sympathizing, Democrat, welfare-nanny-lovin' Clintonite," it does NOT refer to my political philosophy. It's inaccurate a term at best, and when used by "non liberals" in arguments to describe "typical behaviour" on part of "liberals," it IS meant as an insult.

Deny it if you wish, you neocon fascist. ;)
Just call me simple-minded, but I don't attach all that baggage to the word conservative. Oh wait, that's part of what y'all liberals mean when you call us conservative, isn't it?

Begoner21;11686704']Ah, yes, the typical liberal recourse -- the invokation of the conservative-Hitler comparison. So predictable. Do liberals actually have a playbook, or do they all just think alike?

You mean you didn't know about the hive mind? :rolleyes:

Just call me simple-minded, but I don't attach all that baggage to the word conservative. Oh wait, that's part of what y'all liberals mean when you call us conservative, isn't it?

I wasn't talking about the word conservative. Didn't even mention it.

I was talking about the word liberal, and the baggage folks like you attach to it. Do try to keep up.

Just call me simple-minded, but I don't attach all that baggage to the word conservative. Oh wait, that's part of what y'all liberals mean when you call us conservative, isn't it?

Nope. I think they use ignorant cracker at that point. :p

When people use "liberal" and obviously mean it to mean "terrorist-sympathizing, Democrat, welfare-nanny-lovin' Clintonite," it does NOT refer to my political philosophy. It's inaccurate a term at best, and when used by "non liberals" in arguments to describe "typical behaviour" on part of "liberals," it IS meant as an insult.

Deny it if you wish, you neocon fascist. ;)

You forgot anti-christian baby killing homo. ;)

Define "egregious extremes." And putting state authority above civil rights is a trait found in dictatorial countries, not free ones. And who is to decide "what's best for the country as a whole?"
Why should anyone care "what's best for the country as a whole"?

And what does this Begoner person think I'm sacrificing by insisting on my right to free speech, a free press, free association, etc? All I see being sacrificed is his idea of what I should be interested in. I suppose that matters to him, but he has yet to tell us why we should care about what matters to him.

Am I a liberal? Yep. I believe in justice and equality. I believe in fairness and the right of the people to seek redress against those who harm them, including big business and their own government. I believe in the ability (if not the willingness) of human beings to govern themselves without needing a daddy (read: state) to lead them or protect them or care for them or whatever bullshit propaganda is on sale at the moment. Every time some rightwinger calls me a "liberal," it's a compliment.

Btw, regarding that "what's good for the country" crap, I'm an American as well as a liberal. That means that nobody rules me. The state serves me, not the other way around, and it better fucking not forget it. The cops need a warrant to enter my home without my permission, and if a politician, including the president, wants to talk to me, he needs to wait for permission and then address me as "Ma'am." And if anybody gives me shit, they'll get shit right back, from my attorneys.

And finally, I opposed the Iraq war from the start, but not because I'm a liberal. I opposed it because it was, is, and shall continue to be a murderous load of bullshit, an international crime, and a betrayal of every principle on which this nation was built.

And anyone who has a problem with that opinion is free to dismiss it a typical liberal behavior.

Why should anyone care "what's best for the country as a whole"?

And what does this Begoner person think I'm sacrificing by insisting on my right to free speech, a free press, free association, etc? All I see being sacrificed is his idea of what I should be interested in. I suppose that matters to him, but he has yet to tell us why we should care about what matters to him.

Am I a liberal? Yep. I believe in justice and equality. I believe in fairness and the right of the people to seek redress against those who harm them, including big business and their own government. I believe in the ability (if not the willingness) of human beings to govern themselves without needing a daddy (read: state) to lead them or protect them or care for them or whatever bullshit propaganda is on sale at the moment. Every time some rightwinger calls me a "liberal," it's a compliment.

Btw, regarding that "what's good for the country" crap, I'm an American as well as a liberal. That means that nobody rules me. The state serves me, not the other way around, and it better fucking not forget it. The cops need a warrant to enter my home without my permission, and if a politician, including the president, wants to talk to me, he needs to wait for permission and then address me as "Ma'am." And if anybody gives me shit, they'll get shit right back, from my attorneys.

And finally, I opposed the Iraq war from the start, but not because I'm a liberal. I opposed it because it was, is, and shall continue to be a murderous load of bullshit, an international crime, and a betrayal of every principle on which this nation was built.

And anyone who has a problem with that opinion is free to dismiss it a typical liberal behavior.

Well done, mi amigo, well done! I must agree wholeheartedly.

Begoner21;11686625']You're not a liberal on all issues. Hell, I'm probably as liberal as you overall. You're liberal where it counts -- where you let personal "freedoms" get in the way of what's best for the country as a whole, and the world as a whole for that matter. I usually use the term "liberal" to denote somebody whose ideas of personal freedom are taken to egregious extremes where many things are sacrificed to maintain such a level of liberty.
Yeah, sometimes things have to be sacrificed. I tell you one thing, I'd much rather have the Bill of Rights than the kind of state that Bush wants. He, and you, are advocating the same thing that fascists do: Security in exchange for freedom. It's a shit trade, man. That way lies Soviet Russia.

Why should anyone care "what's best for the country as a whole"?

And what does this Begoner person think I'm sacrificing by insisting on my right to free speech, a free press, free association, etc? All I see being sacrificed is his idea of what I should be interested in. I suppose that matters to him, but he has yet to tell us why we should care about what matters to him.

Am I a liberal? Yep. I believe in justice and equality. I believe in fairness and the right of the people to seek redress against those who harm them, including big business and their own government. I believe in the ability (if not the willingness) of human beings to govern themselves without needing a daddy (read: state) to lead them or protect them or care for them or whatever bullshit propaganda is on sale at the moment. Every time some rightwinger calls me a "liberal," it's a compliment.

Btw, regarding that "what's good for the country" crap, I'm an American as well as a liberal. That means that nobody rules me. The state serves me, not the other way around, and it better fucking not forget it. The cops need a warrant to enter my home without my permission, and if a politician, including the president, wants to talk to me, he needs to wait for permission and then address me as "Ma'am." And if anybody gives me shit, they'll get shit right back, from my attorneys.

And finally, I opposed the Iraq war from the start, but not because I'm a liberal. I opposed it because it was, is, and shall continue to be a murderous load of bullshit, an international crime, and a betrayal of every principle on which this nation was built.

And anyone who has a problem with that opinion is free to dismiss it a typical liberal behavior.
I like your moxie!! ;)

Yeah, sometimes things have to be sacrificed. I tell you one thing, I'd much rather have the Bill of Rights than the kind of state that Bush wants. He, and you, are advocating the same thing that fascists do: Security in exchange for freedom. It's a shit trade, man. That way lies Soviet Russia.

Soviet Russia, Mussolini Italy, Hitler Germany, Francisco Spain, Pinochet Argentina, ect ect ect. Fact is, you can have security while still possessing freedoms. Yes, it can occasionally leave you a little bit more open. But guess what, geniuses on the far-right: that's just the price you pay for freedom. After all, I do believe many of the ultra-militerists on your side are fond of saying things like "Freedom isn't free." That's right: it's not free. But you know what? I'd rather have my freedom and some extra risk, than have no freedoms at all.

Im glad your liberal on alcohol becaure I'm drunk and alcichik us fun. I kive liberals. gi akllcohal party.

Why should anyone care "what's best for the country as a whole"?

Why should anyone care for the well-being of their country? Is that a serious question? The well-being of a country is based upon the well-being of the citizens of that country, so I'd think that everyone should care.

And what does this Begoner person think I'm sacrificing by insisting on my right to free speech, a free press, free association, etc? All I see being sacrificed is his idea of what I should be interested in. I suppose that matters to him, but he has yet to tell us why we should care about what matters to him.

I do not think you are sacrificing anything by insisting on your right to free speech, a free press, free association, etc. I think you are sacrifcing something when you attempt to stop warrant-less wiretaps, to not allow torture to be used, etc. What you are sacrifcing are the lives of American citizens, who will die at the hands of terrorism unless the threat is acknowledged and measures are taken to prevent it. Terrorists would love for there to be no more warrant-less wiretaps and for torture to be illegal -- let's not make it easier for them, eh?

Am I a liberal? Yep. I believe in justice and equality. I believe in fairness and the right of the people to seek redress against those who harm them, including big business and their own government. I believe in the ability (if not the willingness) of human beings to govern themselves without needing a daddy (read: state) to lead them or protect them or care for them or whatever bullshit propaganda is on sale at the moment. Every time some rightwinger calls me a "liberal," it's a compliment.

We all believe in justice and equality -- hell, I do too. It's not like its a trait only possessed by liberals. I also think that people can seek redress against their government -- it's called an election. People can seek redress against big business -- it's called boycotting their products. I believe in personal freedom, too, and that comes with personal responsibility. Are you an anarchist? Do you think that we don't need a government to keep law and order in a country? Are you serious? Go to Darfur -- I'm sure there's not much of a functional government there. Get in a time machine and go to Rwanda -- the government was not that powerful in those days.

Btw, regarding that "what's good for the country" crap, I'm an American as well as a liberal. That means that nobody rules me. The state serves me, not the other way around, and it better fucking not forget it.

Ask not what your government can do for you, but what you can do for your government. Sure, a lot of liberals just suck the benefits of the benevolent government, leaving the rest of us conservatives to work hard to support it. Being lazy isn't a good thing, and certainly nothing to be proud of. Especially when your unwillingness to support the government can lead to the death of others.

And anyone who has a problem with that opinion is free to dismiss it a typical liberal behavior.

Will do.

Soviet Russia, Mussolini Italy, Hitler Germany, Francisco Spain, Pinochet Argentina, ect ect ect. Fact is, you can have security while still possessing freedoms. Yes, it can occasionally leave you a little bit more open. But guess what, geniuses on the far-right: that's just the price you pay for freedom. After all, I do believe many of the ultra-militerists on your side are fond of saying things like "Freedom isn't free." That's right: it's not free. But you know what? I'd rather have my freedom and some extra risk, than have no freedoms at all.

Erm...wrong country. Pinochet ruled (or misruled, rather) Chile, not Argentina. ;)

It always amuses me when people in the US seem not to realise that the word "liberal" doesn't mean the same in different countries.

In Australia, "liberal" is synonymous with "conservative", and the "Liberal Party" is also referred to as the "Conservative Party".

In France, "libéral" means someone is favour of an unregulated free market (and has nothing to do with issues such as morals or civil rights). The Démocratie Libérale party (which has now merged into the mainstream conservative party UMP) was decidedly right-wing in terms of its proposed economic policies.

In the UK, you have the Liberal Democrats, who are rather difficult to classify... They call themselves "progressives", and they're certainly the closest the UK has to a mainstream left-leaning party, but the Political Compass put them right-of-centre last I checked.

And in the US, of course, "liberal" seems to be applied to supporters of the Democrats, a party which is definitely right-wing (by European standards), though not as much so as the ultra-conservative Republicans (which have no mainstream equivalent in most of Western Europe).

Im glad your liberal on alcohol becaure I'm drunk and alcichik us fun. I kive liberals. gi akllcohal party.
A agree, I love alcohol, and I love liberals to.

Hope you're feeling better the morning after :)

Begoner21;11688343']Are you serious? Go to Darfur -- I'm sure there's not much of a functional government there. Get in a time machine and go to Rwanda -- the government was not that powerful in those days.

The Sudanese government supports the Darfur terrorists. And the Rwandan government, not that powerful? wtf? The Rwandan government was powerful indeed, if it had the capacity to wipe out around 1,000,000 of its citizens. Unless you mean pre-colonization, in which case you may have a point...

*snip*

You forgot the neocon definition. Liberal: Anyone who doesn't swallow everything the Bush Administration says and does hook, line, and sinker.

:D

Erm...wrong country. Pinochet ruled (or misruled, rather) Chile, not Argentina. ;)

Pinochet salvaged Chile from the terrible situation in which it was. He aided the country and transformed it into a modern country despite his heavy-handed methods.

"Liberal" and "Conservative" get thrown around a lot, and they're misused. The correct terms in this context are "Progressive" and "Reactionary".

I see this term - meant generally to be an insult - thrown around at me whenever I express certain ideas around certain posters.

For example, to some posters, if I suggest that Islam is not an evil, barbaric ideology - I'm a liberal.

To others, if I suggest that Bush is maybe not the greatest president in the history of the world - I'm a liberal.

To still others, if I suggest that occupying Iraq is not a good idea - I'm a liberal.

I've tried, time and again, to get out of this pigeonhole that I'm supposed to be in. But I can see it's futile. Repeat something often enough, and it becomes true!*

So yeah, I'm a liberal. I admit it. Here's my definition though - something more concrete and not based purely on whether I disagree with your stance.



So, fire away. Criticize me for my evil preference for individual freedom. I can take it. :)

*Or totally meaningless. Whichever.

From the posts that i've seen from you, I conclude that you are a massive drama queen.

Most of the accusations you make never actually happen, and you normally just put words in peoples mouths. You are the one saying things like "oh i gess that makes me t3h 3b1l l1b3ral", not them.

Begoner21;11688427']Pinochet salvaged Chile from the terrible situation in which it was. He aided the country and transformed it into a modern country despite his heavy-handed methods.

Economically, Pinochet was a miracle worker.

Politically and socially, he was a disaster.

There is no doubt that Allende had to go. But nothing excuses the tyranny and slaughterfest which resulted after his removal.

Begoner21;11688427']Pinochet salvaged Chile from the terrible situation in which it was. He aided the country and transformed it into a modern country despite his heavy-handed methods.

So, improve the economy, no matter how many people have to die? :rolleyes:

So, improve the economy, no matter how many people have to die? :rolleyes:

Agreed. One doesn't need to resort to butchery to revive an economy. The West Germans and post-WWII Japanese didn't need to slaughter and torture on a massive scale to bring about economic recovery.

They call themselves "progressives", and they're certainly the closest the UK has to a mainstream left-leaning party, but the Political Compass put them right-of-centre last I checked.

I just checked the US Democratic party and I got -5, -5. Center-left by any measure.

Begoner21;11688453']I just checked the US Democratic party and I got -5, -5. Center-left by any measure.

How'd you obtain those results, if you don't mind my asking?

How'd you obtain those results, if you don't mind my asking?

I don't want to re-post every single question on the survey and the DNP's answer to it, but you can check it yourself.

Begoner21;11688464']I don't want to re-post every single question on the survey and the DNP's answer to it, but you can check it yourself.

I think the key question here is: did you answer the questions using the Democrats' manifesto, or using Fox News?


And Hydesland, Congo--Kinshasa's claims are hardly groundless. While the part about President Bush is exaggerated it happens in a more mild form, and the other two examples are thrown around continuously. If you want, I'll go and find some examples.

Most of the accusations you make never actually happen, and you normally just put words in peoples mouths. You are the one saying things like "oh i gess that makes me t3h 3b1l l1b3ral", not them.

Incorrect. I guess you don't actually read the conversations in which I post. I do, though - makes sense, what with you not being me and all. I have a closer perspective to what is said to me than you do.

Looks like somebody needs to step in and set all to rights, here...

You are all both right and wrong - right in extolling the other side's weaknesses, and wrong in crowing your own side's states. Regardless of the ludicrous amounts of 'our group is the cool group, and those outsiders are smelly' stuff thats at the bottom of this, the political truth of the universe is as follows...

The having of opinions has been the cause of every war, tension and issue in God's green Earth. Try and argue with that...

THE NEUTRALS SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH

Looks like somebody needs to step in and set all to rights, here...

You are all both right and wrong - right in extolling the other side's weaknesses, and wrong in crowing your own side's states. Regardless of the ludicrous amounts of 'our group is the cool group, and those outsiders are smelly' stuff thats at the bottom of this, the political truth of the universe is as follows...

The having of opinions has been the cause of every war, tension and issue in God's green Earth. Try and argue with that...

THE NEUTRALS SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH

I think you're wrong, and I'll fight you over that. :D

I disapprove of liberals somewhat. They're too much into letting companies do as they please for my taste.

That is libertarians. Liberals have businesses take responsibility for their actions...

And political ideologies are not just Conservative or Libera. There is a lot more to it...

Begoner21;11688453']I just checked the US Democratic party and I got -5, -5. Center-left by any measure.
They are most certainly not centre-left.

They are centre-right.

That is libertarians. Liberals have businesses take responsibility for their actions...

And political ideologies are not just Conservative or Libera. There is a lot more to it...
Libertarians don't exist outside of the US, because we call them Liberals everywhere else.

Incorrect. I guess you don't actually read the conversations in which I post. I do, though - makes sense, what with you not being me and all. I have a closer perspective to what is said to me than you do.

Ok then, show me one post on this thread. Where someone has slandered you only for being a liberal.