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.

 

20 Examples of What Liberalism REALLY Is

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

What?




posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

What you actually want is religious privilege.

Where government would dictate where and when it would be appropriate to worship whatever diety(s) people worship.



posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:41 PM
link   
post deux
edit on 19-7-2014 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

I have no need desire to deny people the right to bear arms. Violent crime is already trending down, acts of mass violence will happen gun or no gun and most importantly, I think people should be allowed to do what they want as long as they're not harming anyone else.

There's lots of ways we could reduce taxes. I just don't think that lowering taxes is a panacea (it does not in fact decrease unemployment) but we don't need bogus trickle-down economics as an excuse to demand a better return on our collective investment.

As far as the ACA: at the end of the day all we're doing right now is using tax dollars to subsidize health insurance providers. That doesn't mean that healthcare costs haven't been growing exponentially higher and we should do nothing. I personally favored a public option but that was killed off by the President, behind the scenes and with no fan-fair, because our lobbyist controlled Congress would have never let it pass otherwise (including the so-called "progressives"). I do like the idea of markets and buying insurance across state lines (but only if we're standardizing certain aspects). I don't think that health insurance should be tied to employment or that coverage should be denied for preexisting conditions.

Let me make an appeal to you about net neutrality. There's been a long struggle in this country to establish our current interpretation of the protection of free speech under the First Amendment. Why? Is it not because we believe in unfettered communication? The Internet is the largest public forum in human history. The ISPs have already consolidated to the point that there is hardly any choice at all. If you have only one choice for ISP and that ISP decides to censor you, then you have no choices at all. Without net neutrality we're also allowing ISPs to pick and choose the winners in any online market which should scare anyone who believes in free markets. Huge potential for corporate censorship of the public and massively anti-consumer behavior.
edit on 2014-7-20 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: superluminal11
a reply to: xuenchen

What?


Huh ?




posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

Can you post the Liberal hand book for arguing ?

We'd all like to see it.



No need. It's the same as the Conservative Handbook, only it has words instead of Pictures.




posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

You actually bring up some good points. I'll save the debate on net neutrality for a future thread (I'll do an invite) maybe one on compromises across the board.

Don't want to off-topic too much here.

The fact that you were willing to answer my post about compromise tells me you are at least honest and I will salute you for that.

Sincere thanks.



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 12:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: xuenchen

Can you post the Liberal hand book for arguing ?

We'd all like to see it.



No need. It's the same as the Conservative Handbook, only it has words instead of Pictures.



LOL

Good comeback.

Now I understand why I can read pictures easier.

I always knew Occam's razor was solid.


edit on Jul-20-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 12:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: xuenchen

Can you post the Liberal hand book for arguing ?

We'd all like to see it.



No need. It's the same as the Conservative Handbook, only it has words instead of Pictures.



I like using the green crayons. They taste the bestest!

Saul Alinsky wrote "Rules For Radicals" and it has been used much on ATS.

What would be the conservatives "rule" book?



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

I don't know. You should ask xuenchen.

I'm not familiar with Saul Alinsky either, but that name does sound familiar.



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

LOL

Good comeback.

Now I understand why I can read pictures easier.

I always knew Occam's razor was solid.



LOL

I know, right!!

Even you have to admit that was funny!!

Cheers man!!! Peace!!




posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 12:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: xuenchen

Can you post the Liberal hand book for arguing ?

We'd all like to see it.



No need. It's the same as the Conservative Handbook, only it has words instead of Pictures.



I like using the green crayons. They taste the bestest!

Saul Alinsky wrote "Rules For Radicals" and it has been used much on ATS.

What would be the conservatives "rule" book?


Honestly, I rarely heard Saul Alinsky talked about before 2008. Have either of you actually read Rules for Radicals? I hadn't until recently and it's in the public domain.


Let us in the name of radical pragmatism not forget that in our system with
all its repressions we can still speak out and denounce the administration,
attack its policies, work to build an opposition political base. True, there is
government harassment, but there still is that relative freedom to fight. I
can attack my government, try to organize to change it. That's more than I
can do in Moscow, Peking, or Havana. Remember the reaction of the Red
Guard to the "cultural revolution" and the fate of the Chinese college students.

Just a few of the violent episodes of bombings or a courtroom
shootout that we have experienced here would have resulted in a
sweeping purge and mass executions in Russia, China, or Cuba. Let's
keep some perspective.


Seems pretty anti-commie and well, pragmatic.


"The Revolution was effected before the war commenced," John Adams
wrote. "The Revolution was in the hearts and minds of the people . . . This
radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the
people was the real American Revolution." A revolution without a prior
reformation would collapse or become a totalitarian tyranny.


Quoting the Founders and talking about revolution and 'totalitarian tyranny?'


the fifth rule: Ridicule is man's most potent
weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates
the opposition, who then react to your advantage.


Isn't that what this entire thread is about?

I think xeunchen has actually read it a few times



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 02:03 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


Seems pretty anti-commie and well, pragmatic.


You get extra credit today for deflection tactics !!

You should read between the lines and watch what Alinsky actually does, not what he claims to "say".

Kinda like Obama. No not "kinda"....exactly like Obama LLC.

Different Opinion

Beware of Kanamit Promises !!

www.youtube.com...







posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 04:47 AM
link   
I think the article writer that OP posts needs to look up 'liberalism' in a dictionary.

Because really, people shouldn't be allowed to use words they don't understand.


"Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property."


Because really, freedom, liberty, equality? These are bad things are they? Sounds a lot like the principles the USA was founded on to me...

Ever stopped to ask yourself why the Right keeps painting Liberalism as a bad thing?



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 04:50 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

It's a Xuenchen thread. What else would you expect? He likes stirring things up and then watching the chaos.


edit on 20-7-2014 by AngryCymraeg because: Typo



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 06:28 AM
link   
The ten commandments of libertarianism.

1: Ron Paul is our god, we should have no other gods before the holy Paul.

2: Jon Stossel is the holy Paul's prophet.

3: Hate the liberals, for the liberals are our enemy.

4: Pretend to hate the conservative, even though we are ultra conservative.

5: Revere the holy temple that is the corporation, and the priests the CEO's for they understand money.

6: have faith in our temples the corporation, for when they fill with money they will rain down on the faithful the boon of their fiscal holiness.

7: Fear the great beast Obama, for he is the anti-Paul. Post his evil daily for the world to see.

8: Taxes should never be used for anything.

9: Smite all unbelievers of the holy Paul. Troll them into oblivion.

10: All that receive help are infidels, heap hate upon them for they have no faith in the holy Paul or his temple the corporations, for the free market frees all.



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Which why when someone disagrees with you they aren't simply people who disagree, they are hateful racist homophobic bigots who must be silenced at all costs or anti-science or any one of a thousand other insults ... not simply people who are thinking differently.

Tell me another big lie.

But whatever you have to tell yourself to feel like you aren't thinking like all the other progressives.



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



like the fact that Democrats have a lock/cinch on voting districts with the highest crime and poverty levels.


They also have the wealthiest and smartest people. Republicans have rednecks, greedy people and ancient people.


But wait ... I thought the Democrats were all champions of the little people who constantly tell us that being wealthy is stealing and dirty and evil. So ... why would they have all the wealthiest people again?



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Unless celebrating my religion happens somewhere where you might see it and be offended by it. Then, I can't celebrate. Oh, and I can't live my religion either because my religious practices might cause me to make choices that will offend others.



posted on Jul, 20 2014 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Painterz

Well if the liberals of today were honest, people wouldn't want to have much to do with them. Tyrant as a label isn't nearly as attractive.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join