reply to post by Avenginggecko
Okay let me put my extremely partisan blinders on, which apparently you also did for this smear peace that basically calls people who don't believe
as you do 'retarded' under the transparent euphemism of "developmentally diseased". Sigh.
I didnt call them retards, that was your word not mine. Maybe you just realized the truth.
I'm sorry but Conservatives are just as liable to do this as liberals. No abortion, no gay marriage, no social programs, no taxes for the wealthy, no
diplomacy, no UN, no affirmative action, no evolution, no separation of church and state, no, no, no, no. See how easy that was? I'd also appreciate
you explaining how the above are rooted in selfishness because I don't see how any of the above are due to a selfish cause.
Well saying no to peope murdering their own child is no different than saying no to murder in general. Are you trying to say you are pro-murder?
I dont think most conservatives so no to some social programs. Just no to the ones created by FDR which basically create a welfare state where
someone can have the same things a working person has without working. Also, they dont say no to diplomacy, they try it, but if it doesnt work they
move on to what does. That is way more sensible than playing games with some idiot like Hussein or Ahmybreathisbad.
All the above were rooted in selfishness because liberals want a government that will take care of them so they dont have to risk anything or face
consequences when they make mistakes. They want a Moooommmmyyy and Daaaaaaadddyyyyyyy to come and rescue them for the rest of their lives.
Once again: easily applied to conservative views. Let's look back on the years of Republican control after 9/11. What President had us with a
surplus? Clinton? A Democrat? What President squandered our surplus, created a huge deficit for the country, enacted the Patriot Act, and suggested
anyone who didn't agree with going to war or who opposed his views was unpatriotic? Bush? A Republican?
Prime liberal magical thinking here. Blame Bush for a deficit that was partially created by two wars caused by us being attacked on 911. The deficit
was also created by a declining economy. A president cant control the economy he can only attempt to limit the affects. I guess in your mind we
wouldnt have a deficit because we would have just gave the terrorists a time out or a gentle smack on the hand and hoped they learned their lessons.
Bush didnt label a bunch of Americans terrorists unlike Obamas DHS director who labeled anyone not a liberal a potential terrorist. Jesus.
Once again please refer to the Patriot Act and the small library of Bush's Executive Orders that put us under more government scrutiny than we ever
have been. And typically liberal policies are about protecting individual rights (abortion, gay marriage, for example) rather than trying to legislate
control over others. Also, 'liberals' probably smoke just as much as conservatives. Every smoking ban I've seen enacted is enacted on a city-level
basis, which should be something a conservative supports.
The patriot act was used to open powers to hunt for terrorists. You have to have the ability to look at everyone to a degree. It is not like he
abused it and threw a bunch of liberals in jail. In fact, if you look back Bush was quite kind to the antiwar crowd, and acknowledged their right to
protest. Unlike the liberals who run around screaming racist everytime you disagree with Obama.
Individual rights.
1. Abortion - what about the rights of the baby? Did he decide for mama to get knocked up when she wasnt prepared to have a child?
2. Gay rights - what intrinsic rights do gays have to marry?
Cmon dont even bring up smoking bans. Liberals treat smokers like they are a bunch of people running around spewing out Sarin gas. I dont even
smoke, but I dont throw a hissy fit and act like I just caught cancer everytime somebody lights up a cig.
Are you saying government shouldn't treat everyone equally? Who determines who's a burden? You? Do we throw them in ovens if they start burdening
society? Do we put schizophrenics and downs syndrome people on the streets because they are a burden? Do we start euthenizing retirees that need
additional government help?
No I am saying the government should treat everyone fair and let people live and die by their own choices. If retirees need more help, its their own
fault for not saving their money or making stupid investments. Why should we have to help them? Also, most people regardless of party support
helping trully handicapped or mentally ill people, but you cross a line when you want to hand out money to people with add or slightly low iq, like
its our fault somebody is an idiot.
Many liberals don't like their rights getting stripped away when conservatives try to legislate their morality on the rest of the nation, just like
conservatives threaten civil war when they think their gun rights get infringed. Typically, liberals may get mad when you "question" or "test"
their logic with obvious propoganda, disinformation, and unreliable sources. For instance, the entire OP is basically an attack piece aimed at the
liberal wing on ATS, and I fail to see how anything written in the OP questions or tests anyone's logic. Instead, it comes off as a tantrum itself
and seems to only serve the purpose of collecting points and taunting others into an argument.
Typical liberal thinking. Liberals think they have a right to the government solving their problems and taking care of them. That infringes on
everyone elses right to keep more of their hard earned money.
By definition, social welfare programs can't be "utter self-centerdeness", so you'll need to amend this point so it doesn't contradict or clarify
why you think liberals are utterly self-centered people on the one hand and then enact broad social programs that benefit a large number of people
(and many times not themselves) on the other.
This is total self centeredness because liberals enact laws to suppor themselves they dont care who else it helps as long as it helps them or they
dont have to get their feeling hurt when some fool gets what is coming to them.
In summation I'm very disappointed in this thread's content and execution, because it does nothing but reinforce a negative stereotype of
conservatives, attack a group of people, and continue fostering a poisonous partisan divide.
Lets censor me because I disagree with you. I didnt say you had to read it or post here. Typical liberal tactic of deflecting their problems onto
everyone else.
