Why do liberals support tyrants/Communists/dictators....... EVIL?

Because its the ultimate big government control that they believe in. Plus a lot of them just like anything that isnt the USA like the wack job extremists are on here

.
Attachments:

We like to show pics of Jesus, fucking donkeys.

But, we don't insult the Muslims.

Why?

Because we like them.

They are kind people.

I don't care if you are a liberal or a conservative as long as you share my seething, mouth-foaming hatred of Meade.

ubv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't care if you are a liberal or a
> conservative as long as you share my seething,
> mouth-foaming hatred of Meade.


That's nice, but why do liberals want to be controlled?

Are they afraid of themselves?

Liberal and conservative are meaningless labels that nonetheless keep befuddled sheeple giving their best efforts to advance non-existent bullshit.

Speaking of political action the only difference that matters is: does this advance individual liberty or does it advance tyranny?

Government, all government, every government survives from coercion, theft & murder.

Both your major labels are big g0vernment apologists. There is no such thing as limited government. There is no such thing as government that preserves and protects liberty.

If you as an individual don't have the authority to requireX action from to or take Y from another individual you don't acquire it by banding together to form a gang and presuming to give yourselves in the aggregate authority you lack as an individual.

You who serve government, who are on its payroll: how does it feel to be bought
and paid for? To be tax parasite thugs?

Y Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's nice, but why do liberals want to be
> controlled?
>
> Are they afraid of themselves?


You've got it wrong, friend.

It's conservatives who like to elect their Daddy:

In Conservatives Without Conscience, John Dean places the conservative movement's inner circle of leaders in the Republican Party under scrutiny. Dean finds their policies and mind- set to be fundamentally authoritarian, and as such, a danger to democracy. By examining the legacies of such old-line conservatives as J. Edgar Hoover, Spiro Agnew, and Phyllis Schlafly and of such current figures as Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, and leaders of the Religious Right, Dean presents an alarming record of abuses of power. His trenchant analysis of how conservatism has lost its bearings serves as a chilling warning and a stirring inspiration to safeguard constitutional principles.
Attachments:

.
Attachments:

That is the epitamy of progressivism---> Ultimate control over every aspect of your life. Only then can you reach Utopia. You control it all, from political correctness to the environment, what you can say, what you can wear, what you do and how you do it.

But most progressives are truelly stupid 'feelers'. I don't think most of the ones who do things like suck up to Hugo Chavez etc. really know what they are doing or how they are perceived for doing it.

It's just so much easier when I don't have to think for myself.

John T Washington Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That is the epitamy of progressivism---> Ultimate
> control over every aspect of your life. Only then
> can you reach Utopia. You control it all, from
> political correctness to the environment, what you
> can say, what you can wear, what you do and how
> you do it.

That's really funny, but way off the mark.

Progressives don't want to be controlled themselves.

Progressives want to control YOU.

Ever notice how progressive policies forward their agenda at the expense of YOUR freedoms. Progressives are already politically correct, worship the environment, say what they want there to be said, wear that they want worn, and do things the way they want things to be done. What their policies do is force YOU to do what they want YOU to do.

Feel better now?

With a few simple word substitutions you could say the same about:
1) Conservative Christian Fundamentalists
2) Islamic Radicals
3) Conservative Tea Baggers
4) Soccer Moms
5) Etc.
Groups that see issues as black and white are far less likely to recognize their policies as restricting freedom because the restrictions impose no significant burden on them.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With a few simple word substitutions you could say
> the same about:
> 1) Conservative Christian Fundamentalists
> 2) Islamic Radicals
> 3) Conservative Tea Baggers
> 4) Soccer Moms
> 5) Etc.
> Groups that see issues as black and white are far
> less likely to recognize their policies as
> restricting freedom because the restrictions
> impose no significant burden on them.

No you couldnt. Dictators just embody the liberal dream of being able to be as racist as you want and wipe out people you think are beneith you instead of having to pander for their votes. Why do you think liberals enact policies to keep blacks poor and inner cities ghettos?

Thank you LL102 for proving my point.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you LL102 for proving my point.


Someone whose such an intellectual power house that they use the term Tea Baggers has no point

It's funny in some ways, conservatives purport to hate big government, but expand government intrusion into people's lives. On the other hand, liberals purport to support individual rights, but support and sign bills that erode individual rights.

No LL102. Someone who feels free to cast aspersions on the entire political spectrum to the left of him, yet feels offended when a narrow and unusually ideologue portion of the right is taken to task has no point.

Young Curmudgeon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's funny in some ways, conservatives purport to
> hate big government, but expand government
> intrusion into people's lives. On the other hand,
> liberals purport to support individual rights, but
> support and sign bills that erode individual
> rights.

Yeah, I think that is ironic. To be fair, true conservatives that I know don't believe in infringing on other's liberty. I'm fairly conservative and pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-abortion rights (within some reason).

TrueDatdat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, I think that is ironic. To be fair, true
> conservatives that I know don't believe in
> infringing on other's liberty. I'm fairly
> conservative and pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-abortion
> rights (within some reason).

There are very few true conservatives or true liberals left in politics. Ron Paul is probably closest to "true conservative" on fiscal/monetary issues, but he's not particularly conservative on the social issues.

Bernie Sanders is pretty close to "true liberal," however.

If any one of you change someone's mind in one of these trivial debates it'll probably be the first fucking time in the history of politics that anyone has ever won the other side over. This shit is like a one legged man in a hurdle race, pointless and fucking retarded.

Secret Swammy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Feel better now?


I don't but we definitely have a meeting of the mind.

cobrakai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If any one of you change someone's mind in one of
> these trivial debates it'll probably be the first
> fucking time in the history of politics that
> anyone has ever won the other side over.

You know there is a bloc of voters that are independent and do in fact swing both ways. I am one of them. While admitting that the two-party system sucks it is the independents who shift the direction of the country. The zombies on both sides who pull the blue or red lever are generally idiots or wingnuts in their own right.

The trouble is our career albatross politicians and lobbying system broken government which represents the average person less and less every day is still corrupt. So people like me can only help so much. There are simply too many stupid people(on both sides) and low information voters out there. I don't see this problem getting better any time soon.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No LL102. Someone who feels free to cast
> aspersions on the entire political spectrum to the
> left of him, yet feels offended when a narrow and
> unusually ideologue portion of the right is taken
> to task has no point.


Still cant tell the difference between a 2 and a 3?

Ive yet to see anything different from the liberals on here or the liberal leaders. The dem party of today has taken a HARD left and kept going way past the fence line.

If dems are apparently so moderate then its time they take their party back

Liberal Logic 103 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If dems are apparently so moderate then its time
> they take their party back

The Pelosi/Obama/Reid coalition threw people like me (the moderates) out of the party after 2008. Why do you think Lieberman, Hollings, Bayh, and other moderates retired between 2005 and 2010? Many "solid" Democrats are now hardcore liberals. Just look at some of the responses on here.

Young Curmudgeon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 103 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If dems are apparently so moderate then its
> time
> > they take their party back
>
> The Pelosi/Obama/Reid coalition threw people like
> me (the moderates) out of the party after 2008.
> Why do you think Lieberman, Hollings, Bayh, and
> other moderates retired between 2005 and 2010?
> Many "solid" Democrats are now hardcore liberals.
> Just look at some of the responses on here.

Which is exactly what I was getting at. I disagreed plenty with the Liebermans of the world but when it came to the important issues everyone was on the same page for Americas best interest and I can respect that. He also used real arguments to defend his positions and didnt appeal to the lowest common denominator with scare tactics/bullshit/and straw man arguments which was also respectable.

As im sure you know by now Im not a blind follower of anything, but by no means am I going to spend a second of time or give an ounce of ammo to the idiot ultra leftists on here and just enjoy exposing their bs.

Pelosi and Reid are really more of a problem than Obama when it comes to that. Hes always kind of been the guy they use for popular support and to parade out front but he couldnt even do anything he wanted with a super majority so it seems even his party doesnt take him to seriously. Pelosi and Reid however do know how to get things done and have shown the ability to do so when they want to and have the right number of dems elected to office.

Reids a slime ball but a very good politician. He played the ultra leftists like a fiddle with gun control. He never wanted that to pass to save the Dems in pro gun states from being ousted in the next election and saved them from themselves in that regard while putting on a great show for the koolaide drinkers. As long and he and Pelosi still hold leadership positions Obama or no Obama the Libermans of the world wont be welcomed in the party.

Liberal Logic 103 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've yet to see anything different from the
> liberals conservatives on here or the
> liberal conservative leaders. The
> dem party GOP of today has taken a HARD
> left right and kept going way past the
> fence line.
>
> If dems cons are apparently so moderate
> then its time they take their party back.

There, fix it fo ya!


Attachments: