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.

 

150 Achievements Of Liberalism That Conservatives Seek To Destroy

page: 7
26
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2014 @ 02:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: buni11687

I think so but it sure gets us talking does it not?


I dont mean to be a jerk here...........but please dont try to just pass this off....

You posted this in your OP thinking this was fact, because you wanted to make a political statement about liberals/democrats......

You later after being proven wrong , tried to retract, saying you didnt verify the information......

Then you went on to try to justify some of the stuff posted on there, and THEN outright changing the subject completely when confronted on the fact that what you had posted was both satire and completely wrong.....

You are being intellectually dishonest.........

you were caught with your pants down on this.........its fine , it happens, we all make mistakes.....

....but dont try to dress up the pig............its still a pig..........




posted on May, 25 2014 @ 02:56 AM
link   
From the same article...


It is safe to assume that if the current breed of Republicans had their way, ALL of the above list would have never happened.


Wow, never knew thanks to the OP to bring this into the light.

Liberals are so damn good and pure that even when a conservative creates something good it is really the liberals....lol


Some items on this list were indeed passed or created by Republicans, but that doesn’t make them conservative achievements. It only means that at one time, Republicans favored liberalism and progressivism or that they were willing to work with Democrats for the common good.


And I thought the ultra right Christians were a little scary...



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
The sad part is you don't see how bad those numbers make democrats look...

a reply to: LDragonFire



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: butcherguy

Seriously, what has the aca done but give insurance more money. Hardly more honest and fair


Also Universal Healthcare was ALWAYS a conservative idea until Obama started talking about it.

ACA is almost the same as Romney Care and the plan that Gingrinch put forth in the 90's.

~Tenth


Really? "almost the same" isn't quite true...is it?

RC VS OC

But...you know...Obama keeps lying and no one seems to give a crap.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
The sad part is you don't see how bad those numbers make democrats look...

a reply to: LDragonFire



I don't care.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Be careful your using critical thinking lol!

You think this is the worst thread I have posted on ATS?




edit on 25-5-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Typical partisan shill then. Kind of sad. Good thing I'm libertarian.

a reply to: LDragonFire



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

I'm pretty sure MLK was a republican.

Being a republican and being conservative is accurate for today, but not accurate 40 years ago or 140 years ago.

Lincoln was a liberal/progressive, and he did what all conservatives fear, he suspended habeus corpus, imprisoned members of the press, and basically suspended all rights under martial law all the while fighting a war to free the slaves from the conservative south. Lincoln destroyed the south in effect punishing them for there rebellion. The defeated racist flocked to the democrat party and there party stayed that way till the civil rights act.

The civil rights act changed everything in the political parties.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
Typical partisan shill then. Kind of sad. Good thing I'm libertarian.

a reply to: LDragonFire



Wouldn't being a shrill mean you have to have party affiliation? I hate both parties just i hate republicans more.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   
SInce conservatives do not like change or progress, I would say they would not have tried fire. And if they had, they would not have shared it.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Horrible lists... Just off the bat looking at it already screams bias. U should remake the lists appropriately.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

Not no change, it's slow and well thought out and debated change. That's what the framers intended legislation to be.

It's the reason for three branches of government, so it can be a slow process.

Democrats just wants to steamroll their agenda written by bureaucrats that no one reads until it is enacted. That's how much they hate the constitution. They want new laws that would usurp it and they want it quick. U can say progression in a Marxist direction.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: amfirst1

Do you think the founders wanted obstruction? Do you think they wanted congress to do work for all the people?



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: amfirst1

Do you think the founders wanted obstruction? Do you think they wanted congress to do work for all the people?


That's why they created the House of Representatives with elected officials from equally populated districts to be elected every two years.

The majority of elected representatives in the House always represents the majority of the population.

So, why does 0bama and all the ultra Pro(re)gressives scream murder when the House goes against something?

Don't they believe in the Constitution?

Bush may have actually went along with many Democrat legislations for that very reason when Democrats had control in 2007 and 2008.

Why does ultra 0bama have to be so stubborn and act like a little brat all the time?

p=m/v



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

"The majority of elected representatives in the House always represents the majority of the population."

The majority of the population voted a democrat president, twice. The House has not acted like they represent the majority of the population. Like background checks for guns, fighting ACA every step, no more wars.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

No.

The majority of nationwide Voters voted for 0bama.

The majority of Voters in Republican and Democrat Congressional Districts elected each of the Congressional House Representatives.

Funny how people vote sometimes huh.

Checks & Balances work sometimes.

And nobody at all voted for the (3rd Branch) Supreme Court Justices in any election.

It's in the Constitution. Both Bodies of Congress and the President must agree to make legislation a law. Except when Congress overrides a Presidential veto.

It would have been wise to pay attention in the Civics classes.

The Congressional Districts are as equally populated as possible by law and many re-districting cases are brought to court to ensure the legalities.

And each State gets 2 Senators regardless of population. And many States have 2 different parties represented by their respective Senators.

This whole scenario has the ultra-Left shouting with bullhorns. No wonder they *HATE* the Constitution (except when they have full control of Congress and the Executive Branches that is).

As it stands today, the majority of elected representatives in the House represents the majority of the population.

God bless the Founders !!

Very Cool


p=m/v



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Christ, Banking, marriage, funeral homes..... That's all I can think of.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
The present politically correct canard "playing the race card" has conservative people always accusing commentators who demonstrate the racial aspects of the issues are always put in a pejorative light with:
“THERE YOU GO PLAYING THE RACE CARD.”

The “race card” has everything to do with this American conservative/liberal conundrum it’s just that people stop thinking cleary when race is discussed.

But take you guards down a moment and let me elucidate where this country is and why it is there and clarify the situation.

Before President Johnson’s great society programs and civil rights legislation of the 60’s
there were many southern democrats who were liberal on social issues.
Remember the south was poor and the whites, though doing much better than the black population, were on the most part lower middle class.

You had what one could call Huey Long democrats, the Louisiana Governor then senator in the 1930’s that use to promise a chicken in every pot to the populace.

en.wikipedia.org...


Huey Pierce Long, Jr. (August 30, 1893 – September 10, 1935), nicknamed The Kingfish, was an American politician who served as the 40th Governor of Louisiana from 1928 to 1932 and as a member of the United States Senate from 1932 until his assassination in 1935. A Democrat, he was an outspoken populist who denounced the rich and the banks and called for "Share the Wealth." As the political boss of the state he commanded wide networks of supporters and was willing to take forceful action. He established the political prominence of the Long political family.ext


Unfortunately when Johnson did the great society and civil rights most of the southern democrats, because of their long held racial policies, broke with the populous agenda because Johnson wanted to bring black people in the coalition with civil and economic rights.

They all bolted to the GOP and left the Democratic Party ( ON THE MOST PART) the only party to support popular issues that affected the lower, lower-middle class and middle class economic issues. What this meant in real terms was that the poor southerner because of racism abandoned the populist agenda of Huey Long that would have served the poor in the country because Johnson let the poor blacks into the equation, something that the racialists in the south were dead set against. This ruined the coalition that would have sent this country on a positive populist and progressive liberal agenda, but instead the country split and separated ever since in this conservative/ liberal war.

All the southerners had to do was accept the reality that the black citizens deserved a piece of the pie and stay with the democratic agenda of President Johnson.

Polarization ensued where the southern GOP, because of the association of Afro Americans with social and economic issues, issues that they themselves supported before Johnson’s civil rights laws came, aligned themselves with reactionary policies that even hurt the poor whites of the south.

Now today we have a social and economic monstrosity all due to the fact that some southern politicians couldn’t get over their ancient racism.

This is NOT playing the race card just political and historical fact!




edit on 25-5-2014 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-5-2014 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-5-2014 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 09:36 PM
link   
You mean they actually let women vote?

Just kidding ladies...



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   


give me a conservative list of what they have done for us


Other than meat (ranchers seem to be mostly conservative) they really don't provide anything of value to society that isn't destructive.




top topics



 
26
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join