Liberal here with a question for conservatives....

[TheSarge]

I'll be back, I just don't have time right now to devote to this. I have to eat, then I have to do my work, then I have to leave the house.  I didn't anticipate this forum to be so active.

Yup you thought you could just come in here the day after a historic election and drop your talking points and that no one would challenge them  At least not right away.

Look, guys, I'm just going to admit right now that I'm not that smart. I'm a fan of history, true, but I'm not a history professor. I'm a young student with questions, that's why I wanted to seek out a conservative forum, to ask questions.

Yet you haven't really asked any questions per se.  You've scolded and chided us for factually accurate descriptions of what the Democrat party in this country is trying to do to us...if you were truly a fan of history...and not just what the public school system has indoctrinated you with...then your "questions" would be answered.

But hey I'll take you at your word (for now) that despite what I've seen to the contrary you're here to learn.  Just don't be surprised if what you learn goes against everything you've been told to think over at HuffPo.

It's usually a pretty good shock to the system the first time out of the echo chamber.

[cavegal]

*insert missing popcorn graphic smiley*

[RZZZA]

I want to be challenged, that's why I came here. It's probably best not to think of me as just some "huffpo poster", as I never really fit in there and I posted there with quite a bit of disdain for the general environment and what I considered to be a lack of seriousness and respect for people who did not agree with their political viewpoints. Although some conservatives post there, it's only to snipe and name-call the liberals, and to be fair, the liberals over there only snipe and name-call the conservatives. So it's not a place for intelligent discourse. I have been a part of a mixed community forum before, where liberals and conservatives would debate civilly, so this isn't my first foray out of the echo chamber. That's why, as you can see, I'm very patient and calm with you all. I think I have asked legit questions in my original post, to sum up the questions were "Why has it become a trend for right wingers to name-call the left wingers as socialists/communists/marxists" and "why do the tea partiers claim the imagery of the founding fathers for their own agenda without recognizing that the founding fathers had disagreements similar to the ones liberals and conservatives have today?"

Many of you have answered the first question, you name-call the liberals because you believe the labels are true and that they fit, ok, fair enough. It still seems like the sort of thing that is counterproductive to civil discourse, but if you believe you are right and liberals are dumb and stupid, then obviously civil discourse may not be your aim at all. You have not answered the second question and some of you disagree with the premise of the question to begin with. I, personally, have seen many times on T.V. the coverage of Tea Party rallies and I see people dress up as founding fathers, in colonial attire, waving the Gadsden flag. It's my opinion that this co-opting of early American imagery is disingenuous to the historic reality. If the Tea Party rallies are all about small government as I assume they are, then it would be honest to admit that the founding fathers had plenty of their own disagreements about the nature of our government and what role it should play - they were not all on the same level when it came to politics, far from it.

Now, I have about 20 minutes left before I must get ready to leave and I'm afraid I can't address all of your posts to a satisfactory level in that amount of time. Not wanting you to feel like I'm ignoring some of you, and please know I appreciate your input, I think it's best for me to put off any substantive point-by-point replies till late tonight or early tomorrow.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

If you think "socialist" is rough try being dismissed as a "racist" every time you try to talk about marginal tax rates.

None of us ever took offence being called a capitalist.

If it's not socialism then let people and states self-exempt including relieving them of any tax burdens associated with whatever absurd socialist scheme you have in mind.

The fact is, you can't. You cannot afford to allow people out of social security, public education, welfare, etc etc etc because your entire system relies on taking money away from those who need those services the least and shunting them to those whose votes are being bought.

And spare us the "what about police, roads, fire department?" canards. Providing roads for public use is a far cry from lifting money from one person's pocket to stick into another person's pocket.

And the hypocrisy strikes deeper. As much as liberals/socialists/commies whine about the corrupting influence of corporate money the more businesses you regulate the more those business owners will bribe/lobby their way into politics to be spared the worst regulations or punish competitors.

You're never going to elect 535 Jesus clones to sinlessly manage the government. There are some decent pols but power and money always attract the corrupt.

If you fear TEAhadist President Palin teaching creationism and anti-masturbation messages in a classroom then maybe you might want to disband the federal Dept of Education before we reset our Diebold machines.

You can keep abortion though. I hear they found a gene for homosexuality we can scan for with amnio centesis.

[Thor]

Never have read the Federalist Papers or the Anti Federalist Papers, have you? IMO, that should be requisite before graduating High School. There are "Liberals" in the TRUE sense of the word. Our founding Fathers were true "Liberals". Then there are the Progressives of today's world, who have hijacked the term, "Liberal".  The Progressives ARE Socialists to the core. If not Socialists, Marxists. I would even go as far as comparing some of them to the  Fascist regimes.

[Attero Dominatus]

I, personally, have seen many times on T.V. the coverage of Tea Party rallies and I see people dress up as founding fathers, in colonial attire, waving the Gadsden flag. It's my opinion that this co-opting of early American imagery is disingenuous to the historic reality. If the Tea Party rallies are all about small government as I assume they are, then it would be honest to admit that the founding fathers had plenty of their own disagreements about the nature of our government and what role it should play - they were not all on the same level when it came to politics, far from it.

They agreed enough to form the Bill of Rights, which, again, limits the governments power.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I, personally, have seen many times on T.V. the coverage of Tea Party rallies and I see people dress up as founding fathers, in colonial attire, waving the Gadsden flag. It's my opinion that this co-opting of early American imagery is disingenuous to the historic reality. If the Tea Party rallies are all about small government as I assume they are, then it would be honest to admit that the founding fathers had plenty of their own disagreements about the nature of our government and what role it should play - they were not all on the same level when it came to politics, far from it.

They also fought to be left the **** alone. They fought because a tax rate went from 1.5% to 2% without their consent.

So what if people dress in 18th century garb. They are tapping into an ideal.

When the little ****tards dribbling out of colleges like so much anal leakage dress as the title character from the movie V are they endorsing religious terrorism--from a Catholic no less--or are they appealing to some (asinine) romantic ideal they have?

Thomas Paine would like Obama well enough on social issues but he would also like the idea that government only serves at the consent of the people, people do not serve the government.

[Carl]

I want to be challenged, that's why I came here. It's probably best not to think of me as just some "huffpo poster", as I never really fit in there and I posted there with quite a bit of disdain for the general environment and what I considered to be a lack of seriousness and respect for people who did not agree with their political viewpoints. Although some conservatives post there, it's only to snipe and name-call the liberals, and to be fair, the liberals over there only snipe and name-call the conservatives. So it's not a place for intelligent discourse. I have been a part of a mixed community forum before, where liberals and conservatives would debate civilly, so this isn't my first foray out of the echo chamber. That's why, as you can see, I'm very patient and calm with you all. I think I have asked legit questions in my original post, to sum up the questions were "Why has it become a trend for right wingers to name-call the left wingers as socialists/communists/marxists" and "why do the tea partiers claim the imagery of the founding fathers for their own agenda without recognizing that the founding fathers had disagreements similar to the ones liberals and conservatives have today?"

Many of you have answered the first question, you name-call the liberals because you believe the labels are true and that they fit, ok, fair enough. It still seems like the sort of thing that is counterproductive to civil discourse, but if you believe you are right and liberals are dumb and stupid, then obviously civil discourse may not be your aim at all. You have not answered the second question and some of you disagree with the premise of the question to begin with. I, personally, have seen many times on T.V. the coverage of Tea Party rallies and I see people dress up as founding fathers, in colonial attire, waving the Gadsden flag. It's my opinion that this co-opting of early American imagery is disingenuous to the historic reality. If the Tea Party rallies are all about small government as I assume they are, then it would be honest to admit that the founding fathers had plenty of their own disagreements about the nature of our government and what role it should play - they were not all on the same level when it came to politics, far from it.

Now, I have about 20 minutes left before I must get ready to leave and I'm afraid I can't address all of your posts to a satisfactory level in that amount of time. Not wanting you to feel like I'm ignoring some of you, and please know I appreciate your input, I think it's best for me to put off any substantive point-by-point replies till late tonight or early tomorrow.

It is clear that many of the founders had differing views of governance and out of that grew the federalist and anti federalist parties.
Many of those basic divisions still exist however it is also clear beyond argument that none of the founders envisioned a government so enormous and tyrannical as the one that exists today.

Do you believe that they (the founders) believed in a government that considers itself to be the adjudicating force regarding "fairness"?
Do you believe that the founders thought that government should allow for a perpetual and generational welfare state?
Do you believe that the founders ever imagined that there would be a government that demands the public through taxation be a servant of the state?

You really need to take a look at our history outside of a desire to make it fit your wishes.

[RZZZA]

"When the little ****tards dribbling out of colleges like so much anal leakage dress as the title character from the movie V are they endorsing religious terrorism--from a Catholic no less--or are they appealing to some (asinine) romantic ideal they have?"

I think those people are from 4chan...They're down with general mischievousness and trolling the hell out of what they call "moralfags", although 4chan posters do not all agree with eachother, there is also a lot of good that 4chan does, such as exacting revenge on that terrible woman in detroit who mocked the fatal disease of a young girl living next door to her as well as the death of her mother from said disease. 4chan = vigilantes, hackers and tricksters

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

It is clear that many of the founders had differing views of governance and out of that grew the federalist and anti federalist parties.
Many of those basic divisions still exist however it is also clear beyond argument that none of the founders envisioned a government so enormous and tyrannical as the one that exists today.

Do you believe that they (the founders) believed in a government that considers itself to be the adjudicating force regarding "fairness"?
Do you believe that the founders thought that government should allow for a perpetual and generational welfare state?
Do you believe that the founders ever imagined that there would be a government that demands the public through taxation be a servant of the state?

You really need to take a look at our history outside of a desire to make it fit your wishes.

Methinks he had a cocktail party in the Hamptons to trot off to. Nonetheless, I doubt he'll actually debate a point much less a historical one. Implying we are mis-educated is far less riskier an enterprise.

[RZZZA]

I'll try my best to debate your points, I'm just pressed for time. It's not a cocktail party I have to go to, I have certain real life obligations that take precedence over an internet forum. I'm sure you all, being conservatives, understand that a person must work for a living instead of sitting at home messing around on the internet all day. Although it would be sweet if I were paid to do that.

I have read the federalist papers and I read *most* of the anti-federalist papers, I agree they should be mandatory teaching in public schools. I was never taught this, I had to find them and read them myself. I think it was Mark Twain who said "Don't let schooling interfere with your education."

[JohnnyReb]

When RZZZA is my age, he will be sick of socialism....Social Security alone will have bankrupted this country. He'll be paying in half or more of what he makes to keep up the retirees....and industry will be...I don't know if it'll even exist...industry will be matching those funds if they exist further damaging the economy.

Social Security is a pyramid sales scheme, ponzi scam, a change letter scam and RZZZA will be one of the big losers when it falls. If that isn't enough, the rest of what he earns, if he even works, will be taken for the other socialist programs.

  

[blitzkrieg_17]

Methinks he had a cocktail party in the Hamptons to trot off to. Nonetheless, I doubt he'll actually debate a point much less a historical one. Implying we are mis-educated is far less riskier an enterprise.

Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something.

[DixieBelle]

Read my sig line.

[RZZZA]

"Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."

what's the deal, why must you flame me? I'm being nice to you guys yet some of you are being unnecessarily mean and petty. This is the reason I left Huffpo yet the environment here is not seeming so different. So what if someone does pick up trash for a living? Having a job is noble, no matter what it is, I don't make fun of garbage men or fast food workers.

[cavegal]

"Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."

what's the deal, why must you flame me? I'm being nice to you guys yet some of you are being unnecessarily mean and petty. This is the reason I left Huffpo yet the environment here is not seeming so different. So what if someone does pick up trash for a living? Having a job is noble, no matter what it is, I don't make fun of garbage men or fast food workers.

*insert the b-fn-hoo smiley*

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

"Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."

what's the deal, why must you flame me? I'm being nice to you guys yet some of you are being unnecessarily mean and petty. This is the reason I left Huffpo yet the environment here is not seeming so different. So what if someone does pick up trash for a living? Having a job is noble, no matter what it is, I don't make fun of garbage men or fast food workers.

Call it a rite of passage.

You won't get banned for being liberal (not that DU will say the same for conservatives) but you will be a chew toy.

Just ask soliel.

We, even I, were merciless when she arrive and ID'ed as a liberal. In time she weathered the tides and we not only accepted her but we defended her against other long term board members who took umbrage with her mere presence.

The fact is we're tired of being called racist, knuckle-dragging, Bible-thumping xenophobic, misogynists...and then have every member of our coalition that is female, non-white, non-Christians, immigrant born deride as a not-authenitic-enough-race/gender-traitor.

You're gonna take the sabot rounds when you first crest the hill but if you stand your ground without arrogance or puss-tardity and eventually we'll stop shooting.

HINT: conservatives never respect that which is given and hold only contempt for that which is demanded...but they deeply admire that which is earned.

Savvy?

[debk]

"Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."

what's the deal, why must you flame me? I'm being nice to you guys yet some of you are being unnecessarily mean and petty. This is the reason I left Huffpo yet the environment here is not seeming so different. So what if someone does pick up trash for a living? Having a job is noble, no matter what it is, I don't make fun of garbage men or fast food workers.

FYI....

"More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."   = guys in the orange coveralls literally "picking up the trash" - that would be pop cans, bags from MickeyD's, various and sundry items of trash - thown out the window of a car or truck along the roadway. This is not a job with a salary, nor is it a volunteer position - it is usually determined by a person in a black robe, sitting at the front of a courtroom at a desk on a dais who is addressed as either "Your Honor" or "Judge --- "

"someone (edited to add: who) does pick up trash for a living?" = the employed individual who either drives or rides along on a garbage collection truck picking up bagged/binned garbage in a residential or commercial setting.....in most areas a rather well-paying job, usually done by an extremely fit/muscled individual. This person not only collects a regular paycheck, but most likely has benefits such as health insurance and paid vacations.

Understand the difference? 

[dutch508]

"Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."

what's the deal, why must you flame me? I'm being nice to you guys yet some of you are being unnecessarily mean and petty. This is the reason I left Huffpo yet the environment here is not seeming so different. So what if someone does pick up trash for a living? Having a job is noble, no matter what it is, I don't make fun of garbage men or fast food workers.

First, welcome to CC.
Second- bitchslap for a shitty name, unless you are latino, then bitchslap again for being a ****ing racist.
Third, As mention by others, being a whiny little POS cocksucking leftist won't get you banned. The rules are fairly simple here, and I am sure Thor (Whiny poopy head that he is) or Odin's Hand (dominate hand...if you catch my drift) will let you know if you do break a rule now and again.
You are gonna catch shit here. Everyone does. It's something that (in my humble opin) that we could trace to the military of other such groups that routinely treat each other like shit until you prove yourself, and then treat you worse.  You either 'man' up and learn how to dish it back or you go off crying for your momma. You want to chew someone out with no holes barred, once you get to 50 posts, call them out in the fight club.

What we see mostlybut leftists showing up here is a respouting of talking points, hurt feelings because we don't treat them nice (they don't notice we don't treat each other nice) and they either flame out or fade away.
A few stay on and are treated with the total disrespect we treat everyone with, making their idiotic points a view a drag on everyone.
If you can put up with it, welcome to honest communication between, as the president says, enemies.

****ing tosser.

[Carl]

"Doubt it, SB. More likely he had to go pick up trash or something."

what's the deal, why must you flame me? I'm being nice to you guys yet some of you are being unnecessarily mean and petty. This is the reason I left Huffpo yet the environment here is not seeming so different. So what if someone does pick up trash for a living? Having a job is noble, no matter what it is, I don't make fun of garbage men or fast food workers.

Guy,no one has flamed you...your choice of throwaway email name has been brought up as it relates to your supposed desire for civil discourse.
That you just shrugged off.

Several of us here have asked you pointed questions regarding your premises and have called on you to answer and defend.
You have not at this point so whining about treatment is a diversion.

Get back to the point you tried to make in the op and defend it against the points made in opposition.

[dutch508]

....blabbling like you were talking to a toddler...

Understand the difference? 

OMG! Did you wipe his ass with a wetwipe while you were at it?

I don't normally strike girls, so you get a B-spank.

[debk]

OMG! Did you wipe his ass with a wetwipe while you were at it?

I don't normally strike girls, so you get a B-spank.

 :P


somebody had to be a little bit pleasant.... ;D

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

OMG! Did you wipe his ass with a wetwipe while you were at it?

I don't normally strike girls, so you get a B-spank.

H5

Not for anything meritorious but because you H5/BS counter was out of synch.

[Thor]

Dutch, you lame assed bastard, you're being way too nice. ****in Doggie.....

[dutch508]

Dutch, you lame assed bastard, you're being way too nice. ****in Doggie.....

Last time, I just kicked reagancumstain in the nuts and he's still not over it. I thought at the very least I'd point this turd sucker in the right direction before I kick him in the nuts.


assuming he has any.


or is a he.


Hey, if you are a good looking girl, it's in the by-laws you have to post a picture.

(happy now/)