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.

 

What's wrong with Liberals?

page: 16
33
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc

you wouldn't even have to worry about how many of our tax dollars went to food and other services for the poor, if the government wasn't skimming most of the taxes off the top and using them to manipulate other countries




posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: avgguy

I'm a liberal.

I'm not FOR abortion.

I'm not FOR the death penalty.

I'm not FOR illegal immigration.

Do you have evidence of these "constant attacks" on Christians in any media?

As a liberal, I recognize that terrorists and would-be terrorists around the world use religion to justify their activities.

I'm not FOR allowing the violent to hide behind their religions.

Finally, you're FOR billionaires using their funds to buy elections and candidates on both sides of the aisle?

As a liberal, I'm not FOR any of those things. Neither are any of the other liberals I know.
edit on 7Mon, 06 Apr 2015 07:13:15 -050015p072015466 by Gryphon66 because: noted



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc
And I'd love to see a Democrat run for President that isn't about gun grabbing, race baiting and shipping jobs overseas.


Our current President has never been about shipping overseas and everytime he tries to do something about it, he gets blocked by the opposition.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc
I am attempting to communicate with and understand a mental disorder.

And I am responding to your efforts to bait those whose politics offend you by using 'Are you still beating your wife"-style polemics. If you're seriously trying to understand those you label 'Liberals', then I suggest you seek out commonalities and talk about those. Barring that, if you are really seeking out a career as a troll, best add a little subtlety to your toolkit.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Junkheap

Well, for that matter Obama hasn't "grabbed guns" either.

And standing up for victims of violent crime is not race-baiting ... except to racists.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

It seems to me that you only chose the title "Liberal" because you hate white people and believe Republicans to be the "white party".



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   
I'm a leftist, although I do agree with gun ownership, and I think most of these modern rabid feminists are just bozos who like to whine and don't have any idea how easy their lives are in the west. When it comes to political correctness, I'm kind of pro-PC when it comes to race issues. But not necessarily with other things. I've never hated a gay person in my life, but sometimes I jokingly use words like 'queer' in a satirical way. Boo-hoo, sue me.

Nobody is 100% left or right.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc
a reply to: Gryphon66

It seems to me that you only chose the title "Liberal" because you hate white people and believe Republicans to be the "white party".


It seems to me that your posts are dishonest, zero-content efforts that do little more than tell others what they believe.

So much for honest debate, eh?



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc


You want to play the race card all day? Fine. So can I.


I'm pretty sure that non-stop blathering of barely coherent racist propaganda is written into your job description

So - not really impressed
edit on 4/6/2015 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc
So let's discuss what I've learned in the past 14 pages.

Liberals think they're always right.
Liberals are immune to understanding their own hypocrisy.
This is caused mostly by borderline narcissistic tenancies.
Liberals view the rest of us as beneath them, almost to the point that they believe themselves to be enlightened. It's similar to the God's chosen people complex the Israelis have. This can be seen when attempting to communicate with a female member of their species and told that the simple act of common friendship would never be possible.
Modern American Liberals have a lot more in common with Libertarians yet refuse to admit it, probably because they themselves believe they're closet Communist but sadly, they don't have the stones for it.
At the end of the day, their position is usually weak to the people that cards are constantly played. Indeed, it seems that underlying specks of narcissism causes this behavior which is why they are incapable of admitting when they are wrong... even when facing instances of hypocrisy. The party, what they believe, and their overall tribal behavior, is placed above even the rest of the tribe... again, simply to fuel their underlying egomaniac trait.

Thus I've concluded that Liberalism is, in part, a mental disorder. Again, this is my opinion. Just what I've gathered in the past 14 pages.

So, who are the Liberals you refer to in this thread?



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Oops, forgot this:

originally posted by: STTesc
a reply to: Greven

Then maybe it should be allowed if the majority of people don't have a problem with it? Oh wait, you're comparing the 1950s to 2015.

Have you not paid any attention to the last 6 years of Barack Obama's presidency?



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc

Typical Liberal response is to not actually address anything that was said, but instead attack you for saying anything. "You sound like some crazy TV person," not "What you said was incorrect, and here is why." I really hate to lump a bunch of people into one big dumb group, but it's really the only responses I ever see. Seriously, I have never seen a liberal actually respond constructively to any criticism ever.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Indeed. the idea that you are entitled to what you earn is far more selfish than the idea that you are entitled to what someone else earned.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven

I think the problem, is that liberals don't know what discrimination means. They think it means someone doesn't get what they want. Discrimination, in the case of stupid bakeries and pizza shops, would be the denial of services regularly afford to other demographics. Homosexuals can buy the exact same cakes heterosexuals buy, so long as it doesn't conflict with their constitutionally protected religious rights. I'm sorry if you don't think anyone should have faith in any religion, or even just Christianity (since no one seems to mind that Muslim bakeries in the U.S. make the same decisions, and Muslims outside of the U.S simply through homosexuals off of building or cut of their heads). So, let's say a birthday cake. Both a homosexual couple and heterosexual couple can buy the same cake. Now, if there were a them that went against the proprietor's beliefs (doesn't have to be a gay theme, but for this example let's say it is) and the service was refused, do you believe that a heterosexual person WOULD be able to request that service and have their request granted? Obviously not. So, no one is actually being discriminated against. Only specific messages are being discriminated against, again due to a constitutionally protected right. I know people like to use the "no blacks" argument. But that's the difference, and that argument shows just how narrow minded the person making it is. Black people weren't allowed in the store at all. They didn't even have the opportunity to buy the same cake as white people. If they were allowed in, they were segregated... for example, hypothetically only being allowed to buy "black" cake. It's a completely different scenario now, and one lacking any evidence of legitimate discrimination. It would appear that what's really going on is that a fascist portion of a vocal minority are most interested in singularly attacking religious freedom for Christians... which actually is discriminatory.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:08 AM
link   
If you cannot see by now the liberalism is dominating the entire media and news and elections and it is ruining the country,you have to be living in an alternate world.
Liberals do not even lead blacks out of poverty but whine about it constantly.
Liberals somehow believe wars are terrible but mass abortion murder is no big deal.They literaly are going insane in the head.

Liberals get angry over a government they like that does not even protect their own borders.They say nothing about a government who allows insanity amount of debt.
Liberals say nothing about the illegal C.I.A. gun running ops that congress does not vote on,yet demand Quantonimo Bay to be shut down.When Quantonimo Bay is one of the safest prisons in the world.

Watch CNN,suppose to be the best honest journalist who strive to not be onesided.Most of them are liberals and they show their bias crap all the time.
They demand conservatives to give answers on homosexuals marriage.Yet do not demand discrimnation against conservative people.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

You say that that the poorest 20% should get 10% of the taxes? I'm not sure what their tax rate has to do with anything. I mean, 27% of nothing is still nothing. But basically, you want the middle class (whose rate is still in the 27% range since the majority of their income isn't coming from capital gains) to pay them more. Why? Just because you feel like it, really. In your mind it's better that the middle class be poorer, if it means a non-contributing class get richer. I guess you could say, "wait, I want the upper class to pay for it all, not the middle class!" Then you'd be a fool to think that would ever happen. Ever hear of outsourcing? How do you think that happened? Now multiply that.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: neveroddoreven99
I think the problem, is that liberals don't know what discrimination means. They think it means someone doesn't get what they want. Discrimination, in the case of stupid bakeries and pizza shops, would be the denial of services regularly afford to other demographics. Homosexuals can buy the exact same cakes heterosexuals buy, so long as it doesn't conflict with their constitutionally protected religious rights. I'm sorry if you don't think anyone should have faith in any religion, or even just Christianity (since no one seems to mind that Muslim bakeries in the U.S. make the same decisions, and Muslims outside of the U.S simply through homosexuals off of building or cut of their heads). So, let's say a birthday cake. Both a homosexual couple and heterosexual couple can buy the same cake. Now, if there were a them that went against the proprietor's beliefs (doesn't have to be a gay theme, but for this example let's say it is) and the service was refused, do you believe that a heterosexual person WOULD be able to request that service and have their request granted? Obviously not. So, no one is actually being discriminated against. Only specific messages are being discriminated against, again due to a constitutionally protected right. I know people like to use the "no blacks" argument. But that's the difference, and that argument shows just how narrow minded the person making it is. Black people weren't allowed in the store at all. They didn't even have the opportunity to buy the same cake as white people. If they were allowed in, they were segregated... for example, hypothetically only being allowed to buy "black" cake. It's a completely different scenario now, and one lacking any evidence of legitimate discrimination. It would appear that what's really going on is that a fascist portion of a vocal minority are most interested in singularly attacking religious freedom for Christians... which actually is discriminatory.


It seems as if you are characterizing me as a liberal. You, like others, are mistaken.

In doing so, you construct a variety of strawmen in this wall of text, which is pretty funny:
"liberals ... think [discrimination] means someone doesn't get what they want"
"I'm sorry if YOU don't think..."
"do YOU believe ... Obviously not"

Discrimination is pretty simple: treatment towards individuals based on perceived grouping. In the case of the pizza shop, it won't cater a gay wedding. In the case of government (and often other business) hiring, discrimination is also commonly done - military veterans are often treated differently than those who have never served.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: STTesc
The one-sided opinion is the hall-mark of the worse politically motivated sorts.

In the course of following to a justifiable conclusion, a LIBERAL attempts to figure out the BEST non-ideological route. The path marked by the BEST research and to try to avoid the pit falls of fashion and fervor.
This does not mean that rancor will not be expressed but it is byplay to the reasoning that has to be the most evidentiary based outcome.

As a fer-instance: The folks in Utah found that the best cure (cheapest, most healthful, least intrusive to the individual and society) for ameliorating homelessness is to JUST GIVE THEM HOMES. This appears to be contrary to all the 'conservative' moral paragons. The state giving away stuff to cure stuff.
What the average 'conservative' believes (as opposed to knowing) consumes them and whatever spare reasoning power they possess. It is because they fail to understand the concept of society that is inclusive. They attribute separate outcomes and efforts to the individual when they are never truly free of the foundation which allows them to proceed.

They think that if you were born on third base in this system, you deserve it. They think that it the result of work that society succeeds through the individual profiting. It is testable and it is counter indicated to have this concept deployed in every situation. 'Conservatives' are fearful and very much set into their political paradigm because that is how they gain success. The reason that they make these gains is because the rest of society does not want to compete every way, every day to just obtain necessities. NOR DO THEY WANT TO.

Survival-bias afflicts us all. It is a form of hubris to think because you have succeeded in a system, anyone can do so. The unique characteristics (talents, intelligence, physical attributes) can result in a Bruce Jenner, Robert DeNiro, Paul Rand, Koch Brothers, etc., who become notable. I do not think that many can overcome their limitations to become flagrant celebrities such as these or born to circumstances allowing full expression of their innate abilities. Even will power is a limited resource. (Scientific American is the source of this paragraph, you know, that crazy bastion of liberals)

It is the belief that you CAN that makes most 'conservatives' so imponderable. They watch 'conservative' news outlets that add to their ramparts of illogical testifying. They do not believe in science when it is inconvenient. They believe that they are serving a god's will when they kill, maim and destroy those who are not of their ilk. They are unaccepting of others.

Pretty much they are babbling barbarians who BELIEVE, for no actual discernible, testable reason in a plethora of dopey ideas.

As a free thinker (probably not as much as I think), having wended my way for nearly seven decades through the miasma of 'conservative' inspired ideations (trickle down economics, war is good unless it's my kids in it, etc.) I will say with certainty that they never grasp the obvious. That they are merely tools of their own oppressors.

LBJ said that as long as you said the black dude will get your job, you could always get elected. They aren't saying it as obviously racist anymore. Now they say that 'they' are getting everything for free while clinging to your boots. 'They' are eating better than you. 'They' have bigger TVs than you. Then you discover that the majority of these folks live terribly (relative to middle class standards), most of them are white and they vote conservative because they are convinced that the MORALITY of conservatives are superior because they use the flag issues of beliefs in their political parade.

'Conservatives' are simplistic, myopic, fearful and backward looking. They BELIEVE that they are not that the past is where all things good are but in turn are terrible at actually examining history. It is always bent to pre-conceptions of mind numbing narrowness. They do not want to learn what is true (a fluctuating standard to those who are progressive). They want to confirm what they BELIEVE is true.

Bad science, bad politics are of no consequence to a true believer.

We progressives are of a nature to allow others to express themselves because we have doubts about our perfection. It is why we grow tired of their implacability about EVERYTHING. You can only eliminate the people who hold to falsehoods. You can never reason them into acceptance. They just consider you weak and will trample you as soon as they get the chance. NO religion, once it assumes ascendency, permits the continued practice of different systems. Only after they are worn down and discover that alternate ways of looking at things DOES work do they modify themselves.

Dragging 'conservatives' along into the future is a grim and painful task. When automation relieves the entire species of having to perform 'meaningful' work, when the means of distributing resources, by absolute necessity, must become different (It already has but 'conservatives' are always the last to recognize systemic change) it won't be 'conservative' leading lights guiding us to a safe harbor.
They'll be the guys on the shore throwing grenades.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: STTesc
Since I know exactly what your god wants, I judge you.

It's just belief after all, nothing tangible, and when I commune with the spirit of the bible, it finds you lacking.

That's fair, isn't it?



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: largo

Good analogy.

Except for all the well funded programs that have historically failed and led to massive debt and increased problems.

The academics can't seem to solve the biggest problems.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join