Why do you hate liberals and liberalism so much?

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

What, no incanada?

Too intellectual

Just wait - we'll get a rant/tirade yet

be nice....just because you and her don't see eye to eye, it's not enough reason to allude that she's not bright.

What a hypocrite. You do that all the time.

pick one........please

[Jenn! 918]

What, no incanada?

Too intellectual

Just wait - we'll get a rant/tirade yet

be nice....just because you and her don't see eye to eye, it's not enough reason to allude that she's not bright.

What a hypocrite. You do that all the time.

pick one........please

Don't give me that f'in midol ######. How lame.

Sure, I'll find some examples for you, but you'll just go and make excuses as to how it's not the same. And that you were somehow justified in that example for implying that other posters were unintelligent.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Here we go again... there's no 'right' or 'wrong' or 'liberal' or 'conservative'. In fact the word 'label' should be removed from the dictionary. WE GET IT!!

Actually I'd rather settle for people not misinterpreting things (using labels to further their own narrow agendas) and calling an apple an orange, which is something you have just done to my previous post. Second time today I might add

I call an apple an apple. You won't even do that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Here we go again... there's no 'right' or 'wrong' or 'liberal' or 'conservative'. In fact the word 'label' should be removed from the dictionary. WE GET IT!!

Actually I'd rather settle for people not misinterpreting things (using labels to further their own narrow agendas) and calling an apple an orange, which is something you have just done to my previous post. Second time today I might add

I call an apple an apple. You won't even do that.

You'd call a Republican President conservative, and you'd be wrong

Edited September 26, 2006 by erekose

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

What, no incanada?

Too intellectual

Just wait - we'll get a rant/tirade yet

be nice....just because you and her don't see eye to eye, it's not enough reason to allude that she's not bright.

What a hypocrite. You do that all the time.

pick one........please

Don't give me that f'in midol ######. How lame.

Sure, I'll find some examples for you, but you'll just go and make excuses as to how it's not the same. And that you were somehow justified in that example for implying that other posters were unintelligent.

yup, someone is in dire need of it. we have a class 3 midol alert.............

[Fuzzness 2]

What, no incanada?

Too intellectual

Just wait - we'll get a rant/tirade yet

be nice....just because you and her don't see eye to eye, it's not enough reason to allude that she's not bright.

What a hypocrite. You do that all the time.

pick one........please

Don't give me that f'in midol ######. How lame.

Sure, I'll find some examples for you, but you'll just go and make excuses as to how it's not the same. And that you were somehow justified in that example for implying that other posters were unintelligent.

yup, someone is in dire need of it. we have a class 3 midol alert.............

why do you always have to respond with ridicule?

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

What, no incanada?

Too intellectual

Just wait - we'll get a rant/tirade yet

be nice....just because you and her don't see eye to eye, it's not enough reason to allude that she's not bright.

What a hypocrite. You do that all the time.

pick one........please

Don't give me that f'in midol ######. How lame.

Sure, I'll find some examples for you, but you'll just go and make excuses as to how it's not the same. And that you were somehow justified in that example for implying that other posters were unintelligent.

yup, someone is in dire need of it. we have a class 3 midol alert.............

why do you always have to respond with ridicule?

you take it as such. maybe it's a slanted view on your part?

[Fuzzness 2]

you take it as such. maybe it's a slanted view on your part?

riiiiiiiiiiiight.....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What, no incanada?

Too intellectual

Just wait - we'll get a rant/tirade yet

be nice....just because you and her don't see eye to eye, it's not enough reason to allude that she's not bright.

What a hypocrite. You do that all the time.

pick one........please

Don't give me that f'in midol ######. How lame.

Sure, I'll find some examples for you, but you'll just go and make excuses as to how it's not the same. And that you were somehow justified in that example for implying that other posters were unintelligent.

yup, someone is in dire need of it. we have a class 3 midol alert.............

why do you always have to respond with ridicule?

you take it as such. maybe it's a slanted view on your part?

I guess the obvious question would be - how ELSE would someone reasonably interpret what you said?

Just because you say it isn't ridicule, doesn't mean that that isn't what it is.

I've noticed you do that a lot - as if the rules of reality and the meanings of words and phrases change simply because you say so.

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

I guess the obvious question would be - how ELSE would someone reasonably interpret what you said?

Just because you say it isn't ridicule, doesn't mean that that isn't what it is.

I've noticed you do that a lot - as if the rules of reality and the meanings of words and phrases change simply because you say so.

[pedroh 21]

I oppose liberalism on principle because it is pro-business and against social programs/ communities which I consider worth supporting. I also do not like the anti-environment agenda of liberalism but that falls under pro-business I suppose. Finally, while I do agree with liberalisms basic commitment to civil lliberties, I do not agree that individual rights should be extended to corporations as they are not individuals.

Excuse me, but you have it backwards. It is the conservative perspective that is pro-business and against social programs/communities. It is the liberal perspective that supports the environment, supports human rights, and support communities and social values. It is the conservative perspective that has allowed corporations to act as individuals - everything that you are 'against' are liberal agenda items - not conservative/Republican at all. This may be a big part of many people's problems - they don't understand what the real differences in the view points are.

how can a liberal "support" social values when there is no defined value? homosexuality is allowed, drugs are legalized, and so on. is supporting everything negative to society at large a value?

er,, it's not proven yet that homosexuality has a negative impact on society. legalizing drugs doesn't have a negative impact either, check netherlands. those values you talk about are not negative, they are just different. not opposing homosexuality promotes social values, like tolerance and civil liberties to everybody

[Fischkoepfin 1]

I oppose liberalism on principle because it is pro-business and against social programs/ communities which I consider worth supporting. I also do not like the anti-environment agenda of liberalism but that falls under pro-business I suppose. Finally, while I do agree with liberalisms basic commitment to civil lliberties, I do not agree that individual rights should be extended to corporations as they are not individuals.

Excuse me, but you have it backwards. It is the conservative perspective that is pro-business and against social programs/communities. It is the liberal perspective that supports the environment, supports human rights, and support communities and social values. It is the conservative perspective that has allowed corporations to act as individuals - everything that you are 'against' are liberal agenda items - not conservative/Republican at all. This may be a big part of many people's problems - they don't understand what the real differences in the view points are.

how can a liberal "support" social values when there is no defined value? homosexuality is allowed, drugs are legalized, and so on. is supporting everything negative to society at large a value?

er,, it's not proven yet that homosexuality has a negative impact on society. legalizing drugs doesn't have a negative impact either, check netherlands. those values you talk about are not negative, they are just different. not opposing homosexuality promotes social values, like tolerance and civil liberties to everybody

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I oppose liberalism on principle because it is pro-business and against social programs/ communities which I consider worth supporting. I also do not like the anti-environment agenda of liberalism but that falls under pro-business I suppose. Finally, while I do agree with liberalisms basic commitment to civil lliberties, I do not agree that individual rights should be extended to corporations as they are not individuals.

Excuse me, but you have it backwards. It is the conservative perspective that is pro-business and against social programs/communities. It is the liberal perspective that supports the environment, supports human rights, and support communities and social values. It is the conservative perspective that has allowed corporations to act as individuals - everything that you are 'against' are liberal agenda items - not conservative/Republican at all. This may be a big part of many people's problems - they don't understand what the real differences in the view points are.

how can a liberal "support" social values when there is no defined value? homosexuality is allowed, drugs are legalized, and so on. is supporting everything negative to society at large a value?

er,, it's not proven yet that homosexuality has a negative impact on society. legalizing drugs doesn't have a negative impact either, check netherlands. those values you talk about are not negative, they are just different. not opposing homosexuality promotes social values, like tolerance and civil liberties to everybody

The way I read the original comment, it wasn't about Liberal attitudes to social issues, a much as a broadly semantic objection to the word "value"

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

er,, it's not proven yet that homosexuality has a negative impact on society. legalizing drugs doesn't have a negative impact either, check netherlands. those values you talk about are not negative, they are just different. not opposing homosexuality promotes social values, like tolerance and civil liberties to everybody

nor has it been proven that homosexuality has a positive impact.

if you think legalizing drugs does not have a negative impact, please go wander around europe's major cities, with particular emphasis on the main train stations. one pariticular one that comes to my mind is the frankfurt am main hauptbahnhof. druggies all over the ground around it, people taking major detours around them to avoid the needles on the ground, the druggies themself who may stab them with their needles, and of course, the stench of piss all over the place from the druggies. of course, all of that must be a positive thing, eh?

[Fischkoepfin 1]

er,, it's not proven yet that homosexuality has a negative impact on society. legalizing drugs doesn't have a negative impact either, check netherlands. those values you talk about are not negative, they are just different. not opposing homosexuality promotes social values, like tolerance and civil liberties to everybody

nor has it been proven that homosexuality has a positive impact.

if you think legalizing drugs does not have a negative impact, please go wander around europe's major cities, with particular emphasis on the main train stations. one pariticular one that comes to my mind is the frankfurt am main hauptbahnhof. druggies all over the ground around it, people taking major detours around them to avoid the needles on the ground, the druggies themself who may stab them with their needles, and of course, the stench of piss all over the place from the druggies. of course, all of that must be a positive thing, eh?

Thanks for providing us with a premier example of a strict drug policy. Ever since Hessen (the state where Frankfurt is located) has become more tolerant and begun to offer free needles and safe places to shoot up in order to reduce the number of HIV-infections, the druggies of Frankfurt-Hauptbahnhof are gone.