It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why are you a liberal?

page: 8
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: smithjustinb

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

As for the insurance element, then I have to disagree again. What if you get hit by a medical bill that's so large that you just cannot pay it off?


That's the kind of scenario where lawmakers would have to get creative in how they handle this issue while maintaining American values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.


Or your house gets hit by a car? Or a tree falls on it? Then that's when insurance come into its own.


Incidents who's actual costs are greatly overshadowed by the profits the insurance companies make. Insurance companies don't exist for your benefit. They exist for theirs. They come in handy as a means of immediate relief, but that's after you poured thousands into their fund already. More often than not, in the long run, you WILL pay more than what you get out. Its called, "responsible saving". You get what you put in and you put in what you get. Way more fair than the insurance racket.


I'm not claiming that insurance companies exist to pass out free puppies and buckets of sunshine. But I am saying that insurance is necessary in this highly dangerous world.
Let's back away from insurance for a second. You seem to be convinced that Obama has been a failure. I have to disagree, given the sheer obstructionism that has been piled up in front of him by the Republican leadership. Let me ask you one question. Would you have passed the TARP Act?




posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: smithjustinb


Since you are clearly overlooking the fact that republicans have given us bigger gov't just like the democrats.

Can you give us some examples and not just ideology on what have the republicans done to give us smaller gov't that benefited the consumers and not the big lobbyist?

Also why are you concerned with the democrats?Their party is staying in line for the most part as they believe in big gov't and not to mention they have been getting the elections.

Perhaps if you are a true Republican and care about this country you should put some effort into getting back control of your party.

Perhaps you should be concerned that your party ideals are being broken by your own party and look into :
1. Why did the GOP pick a guy who implemented a socialized healthcare type of system as its front runner?

2. Why did the Bush administration think it was a good idea to decide to have government decide the winners and losers of the free market when they started the private bailouts?

3. Why it was a good idea to violate and remove our civil liberties and privacy by having republicans push the patriot act?

4. Why republican controlled congress hasn't de-regulated anything of significant such as the OIL industry?

5. Why republicans expanded the gov't with creating new departments like the DHS and the patriot act.

6. Why the republicans think its a good idea to take away state rights? Why did republicans vote in favor of the GMO lobbying industry to NOT allow states to exercise their rights to decide if they can identify GMO products?









edit on 38531America/ChicagoFri, 23 May 2014 08:38:16 -0500000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

And can I ask about the anti-freedom, totalitarian movement of the right? Liberalism does not equal communism, just as Conservatism does not equal Fascism.


Everywhere I look, it seems like anytime something bad happens in America, liberal lawmakers want to introduce some poorly thought out legislation to try and prevent future occurrences of it. This is in various states. This is also federal. So, my definition of liberal is, "those who claim to be liberal today that do these things". They are SO against freedom. Every accomplishment they claim to make seems to involve poorly thought out legislation that does no one any real good.

Take gun control for example, because its the most blatant one I can think of, although it hasn't passed (as much as they would like it to). Its poorly thought out. They think, "oh yeah, lets make a law preventing assault weapons. Thatll stop them". No. You idiots. That will only stop law abiding citizens. That will only stop the ones you never had to worry about in the first place. Guess what the law breakers are going to do. Take all the time you need to think this one through. Guess what they're going to do. "Duuuuuh break 'em?". That's right. They'll break the law. Good job liberals. You really thought that one through didn't ya? Guess what happens when criminals break gun laws that law abiding citizens don't. Go ahead guess at this one to. Want multiple choice? I'll tell you what will happen. They die. They get killed, robbed, raped, and there's nothing that they can do now because they chose to follow the stupid liberal law and the criminals didn't.

That's just one example of the failed liberal legislation that they would have called, "success". Its stuff like that that makes me sick to my stomach. The utter incompetence of these people who we elect as our leaders. That's the purpose of this thread. Because I just dont get it.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I'm not familiar with that.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: smithjustinb

???? But no-one's talking about taking the guns away. They're talking about background checks. What's wrong with making sure that some nutcase who thinks that Stalin is sending him death threats via his teeth (and who has been hospitalised for that in the past) doesn't get hold of assault weapons?



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: smithjustinb
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I'm not familiar with that.


Apologies, I have a bad habit of thinking that people have the same depth of useless information that I do. TARP was the bailout that Hank Paulson pushed in 2008.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: smithjustinb

Perhaps you should be concerned that your party ideals are being broken by your own party and look into :
1. Why did the GOP pick a guy who implemented a socialized healthcare type of system as its front runner?

2. Why did the Bush administration think it was a good idea to decide to have government decide the winners and losers of the free market when they started the private bailouts?

3. Why it was a good idea to violate and remove our civil liberties and privacy by having republicans push the patriot act?

4. Why republican controlled congress hasn't de-regulated anything of significant such as the OIL industry?

5. Why republicans expanded the gov't with creating new departments like the DHS and the patriot act.

6. Why the republicans think its a good idea to take away state rights? Why did republicans vote in favor of the GMO lobbying industry to NOT allow states to exercise their rights to decide if they can identify GMO products?


These things do concern me.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: smithjustinb

???? But no-one's talking about taking the guns away. They're talking about background checks.


You're wrong about that. There are those that want to pass legislation for completely removing guns. See Diane Feinstein.


What's wrong with making sure that some nutcase who thinks that Stalin is sending him death threats via his teeth (and who has been hospitalised for that in the past) doesn't get hold of assault weapons?


I guess we'd take the guns from people with "ADD" to, if were keeping them away from people who have "mental illness". What's wrong with that idea is what's wrong with most all liberal ideas. They don't take reality into consideration and are based upon a narrow view of how they, with their finite, fallible minds think they are intelligent enough to determine the fate of 300,000,000 people and their children and grandchildren. They may mean well, and I think they do, but they are completely out of touch with the relationship of cause and effect and the way the world works, in general. They shouldn't have the power to make laws like they do, simply because they cannot grasp the implications. This was demonstrated by me in the gun control issue, but also can be seen in just about every other liberal legislation.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Is being liberal different from being a liberal?



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: smithjustinb



Lets not forget to mention his failed promise to close guantanamo bay among many many other blatant lies.

What happened when he tried to close it? The Republicans screamed and cried to keep it open.


“If we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home, we will end this war. You can take that to the bank.”

What did the Republicans say when he wanted to end the wars quickly? They cried it will make America look weak. Republicans love getting our kids killed fighting in nations that never attacked America.


You mean like how the IRS under his administration specifically targeted conservative groups? "republican care nothing for the country just their agenda". Name one such scandal as that one which was perpetrated by republicans to silence liberals the way liberals did to republicans.

You really know nothing about history when it comes to politics do you? Every president uses the IRS that way. Bush did it Clinton did it and presidents will keep doing it.
Under Bush the IRS targeted the NAACP not just for one year but for two years straight.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: smithjustinb


I think everyone should be free to choose if they want to pay for health care. I don't want it.


You say you don't want "health care"...I'm assuming you mean insurance. But you sure as hell are going to run to the Emergency Department if your appendix is bursting. And then what?

I'll tell you what...then you can't pay for it and it becomes everyone else's problem. You have been talking about Conservatives being personally responsible...well the responsible thing for any adult to do is to have adequate health insurance. Not only to cover yourself and family for when something bad happens to your health (and it will, we are all human and all of our health will fail at some point in our lives), but it is the responsible thing to do for your community as well. One of the biggest factors of rising healthcare costs are people without insurance.

In short, you are part of the problem.


I think everyone should be able to live off the wages they earn, but not off the wages I earn. Increasing minimum wage will only cause inflation. Its not going to make the cost of living go down. Sorry, but its going to take more than a pen, a paper, and printed money to solve that issue.


Newsflash, there are some people who work one or more full time jobs that just can't live off the wages they earn. No one is talking about taking the wages you earn...that is just Republican propaganda talking points.

I'm not in favor of an across the board minimum wage increase (remember because I'm an individual and not a Liberal cutout...so is everyone else, you should stop looking ignorant by trying to treat everyone like they are of a hive mind). What I support is a bracketed minimum wage based on the companies profits. A company that profits 1 billion should have a higher minimum wage than the locally owned restaurant who only profits 40k a year. It just makes sense.

We don't need a minimum wage increase, we need a minimum wage reform. But we need something...the solution of telling people "Deal With It" is not a solution, it is a cop out.



Regulations like what? Murder? Strong armed robbery? I'd hate to be caught using a gun for anything it shouldn't be used for. More than that, I'd hate to be caught without one up against some criminal who wouldn't abide by any gun law and would therefore have a gun and me not. Gun control doesn't do anything except take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens (the people that you need to have a gun to protect you from those who will use guns against you(criminals)).

Liberal legislation seems to believe that it can fix the world's problem with a pen and a paper. Conservatives are smarter than that.


To start off with, regulations like a more thorough background check including a psychiatric evaluation. Regulations like a national gun registry that needs to be updated every time a gun is sold, publicly or privately...we do this with cars...it's just dumb not to do it with guns. Make it a felony to be in possession of a gun without it being registered to you...make the penalty very stiff. If the two bit criminal who just wants to feel tough carrying around a gun knows he can get 25 years in jail minimum for just carrying the gun...it might not be worth it. Commit a crime with a gun...50 years minimum jail time. Regulations like banning certain guns....yes, outright banning them from even being made unless it is for direct sale to the military.

Regulations aren't just for the law abiding citizens, which by the way, they don't protect me from jack or squat. All gun nuts do is protect their fragile insecurities by holding their guns. And again, you are just repeating Republican propaganda.

If you are concerned about criminals getting or having guns...then you should be concerned about how easy it is to get a gun in this country. Think about this...most guns that criminals are in possession of were bought legally at one point in time. You don't hear about huge gun heists where criminals rob a gun store to get their weapons. No, they get them because for one reason or another, someone who legally owned a gun lost ownership of that gun...sold it to a pawn shop, sold it to a guy on the street, sold it at a gun show, or had it stolen.

So if you are concerned about criminals having guns...the solution is not "MORE GUNS"...that is the dumbest reaction to the problem.


I agree. I don't agree with the 25% of taxpayer money in 2013 being spent towards medical care (more than spent in national defense). Nor do I agree with the 19% of American tax dollars being spent on various assistance programs. The 2% spent on law enforcement, I could live with.


So we should not provide care for our veterans or our elderly?

Should we just go with the Republican health plan, "Don't get sick, and if you do die quickly"???



Unfortunately, not everyone that comes to this country wants to work hard. There needs to be a system in place that tries to determine why people want to come to this country and this system needs to be the only way to get in. There's no point in having borders if you don't enforce them.


Enforcing the borders to the extent that most Republicans want them enforced are unrealistic, expensive, and a huge waste of resources.

The alternative is to make it so easy to enter the country through a few checkpoints legally...that no one will even want to try to cross the border illegally if they are simply coming here to work. Then all we have to worry about crossing the border are people who are intending to come here for less than desirable motives. Then we can patrol the border with drones and rapid response border teams...because the amount crossing the border illegally will be so small. We can't do that now because there are so many crossing the border that there is no way to tell who is coming for honest work and who isn't.

The solution is simple...make it extremely easy for those that want to come here for honest work...then patrolling the border is easy because anyone not going through a checkpoint you can assume is trying to hide something.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: JaspersCheese

for the record, conservative isnt a political party.............

people need to learn what a conservative/liberal and Democrat/republican is
because all 4 terms arent mutually exclusive to each other.....

Before people can have an intelligent discussion on why people choose a certain party and or ideology, they need to know the diffference....



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

It's not easy to find that out.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: smithjustinb
I think people get confused by what a liberal is, let's look at the history of the first mentions of liberals, if I am not mistaken it happens to have been evolved from the rhetoric of the early catholic church and go back an look at some early texts you will find them mentioned almost as if speaking of heretics, so you see I think some that do not know the early genesis think how you do, and have seriously made an error if you think that liberals are against individual freedom and will , I believe you have that completely backwards.
Liberal simply means liberty and equality, with that said how can you see anything wrong with that simple platform?

Now of course you could go deeper and try and finding other things, especially one that is always used as the major argument against liberals, and the one that is counter to conservative agenda such as views on social programs and responsibility to all all human kind as equals, but of course how you might feel about your fellow human and their condition, well having a choice of how best to address that, is naturally why you have choice, but we all know that if it were truly only liberal and conservative as points of view we would really have a dilemma, almost the same as if we only had only 2 political parties with no other choices, luckily we have more than those two trains of thinking, thus creating real choice, now back to your opening post, what you are posing is a question that makes no sense, it's almost as on par with asking someone why they are either left or right brain thinking.

If everyone thought the same exact way, can I pose this question? what kind of world would we have? well that my friend would be running in close parallel with one world aims, I think that conservative agenda would be easier dominated by any prevailing ideology that might suppress individual freedom or sovereignty , look at history, most tyrannical rule met by revolution has generally been fueled by liberals and liberal agenda, not conservatives, so if we find ourselves suddenly under immediate threat of full blown tyranny, it will not be conservatives coming to the rescue judging by the revolutions of the past, look for conservatives to fall right in line with the ruling agenda.

I do not not consider myself conservative or liberal, I think there is no solidified or absolute thinking anymore in regards to the previous lines draw between liberal and conservative.

edit on 23-5-2014 by phinubian because: spelling



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Tucket

Lol, true enough.

I'm a conservative, but I find it harder and harder to defend the GOP.

They've all been infiltrated, but I'm pretty sure it's a Nazi conspiracy.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: gusdynamite
Is being liberal different from being a liberal?


Very different. The 'liberals' I have met tend to not be very liberal at all. They're as rigid and controlling as a 12th century Inquisitor.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: thisguyrighthere

Thank you for that. Is it possible to be a liberal conservative?



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Lawrence O'Donnel as your example?????


Good hell. Might as well us Ed Shultz, Bloomberg and any other Progressive you can find.

Oh, and Liberals didn't do those items listed. Well, not as what Liberals are today.

Might want to check party affiliation of people like Bull Connor and such and rethink what Mr. O'Donnel says.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Let's just take a second and take a look at the definitions of "liberal" and "conservative"

Liberal: dictionary.search.yahoo.com...;_ylt=A0LEV1XabH9TymsASVJXNyoA;_ylu=X3o'___'B0bGhuNms0BHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ0OV8x?p=liberal&.se p=


1.Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.


2.Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.


Conservative: dictionary.search.yahoo.com...;_ylt=A0LEVy4dbX9TwwsAIFVXNyoA;_ylu=X3o'___'B0bGhuNms0BHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ0OV8x?p=conservativ e&.sep=


1.Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.


2.Traditional or restrained in style.




After looking at these definitions...I think my first response was too detailed.

I would change it to simply:

I am liberal because I am open to new ideas and progress.
edit on 23-5-2014 by kruphix because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: thisguyrighthere

A Liberal is more along the lines of a Libertarian.

Progressives today have hijacked the term 'Liberal", and that is Progressives from both Dem and GOP.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join