Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[KaelGotDwarves]

All libs fault and propaganda for pointing out the originator of the movement is a racist, huh? 

How dare we be judgmental of a racist.

Kind of reminds me of Obama: he never held a real job and is young and very naive.

Call me back when you're a senator and head of Harvard's law review.

[Eagleon]

Whenever there's a good idea (and I will agree with you, Andir, working towards spending only money we have is an excellent goal, but unfortunately that would require sacrifices most Americans are not willing to make, such as $300 million dollar stadiums), it seems like nutjobs, especially conservative nutjobs (who from day one are built to have an intelligence fetish but, like all nutjobs, don't do the work to actually educate themselves beyond what they want to hear) like to piggy-back on them as if they're their own.

Not spending more than you make isn't a new idea whatsoever. If this is what this "Tea Party" is claiming as its core value, and it's also associated with craziness, why not ditch the craziness and keep with the good part? Just saying. You don't sound like a crazy, but you're defending a party that's giving your position a bad rap. This part always puzzled me about politics - if you don't like something about a movement, why be part of that movement? Just take steps to do what's right and forget about the insanity of the system. That earns more respect from people than throwing around 'liberal' and 'n-wing' any day.

[Andir]

That man is one of those extremists... the movement was there before him, but he jumped in one day and claimed the throne of a Tea Party (which, looking back I should not have capitalized my previous uses) to which he applied his ideals.

Don't confuse the issues though.  There is a very real grassroots tea-party movement that deals strictly with the monetary aspect of our government.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Yes, I believe the Tea Party movement started in 1773.

But the modern tea party has de-facto morphed itself into what you see today, and that is it's leader.

Knowing that, do you still call yourself a Tea Party follower or a libertarian? That's what I'd like to know.

[lumin]

I'd take that guy any day over Mao Zedong, one of the founders of the leftist ideology who murdered upwards of 5 million people.

[Zironic]

Anyone not from Amercian knows that a growing majority of independents, moderates from both parties, are becoming very dominant, and I think you'll see moderate candidates take power in November. We are all getting tired of this extremist party bullsh*t. I saw, we expel congress, and replace them with cats. So at least the cats don't each require 100,000 dollar salaries to get nothing done, you just throw them some food, neuter them, and they'll be perfectly content.

[Cthulhu]

Why should we vote libertarian?  Why can't we elect Republicans that believe in fiscal responsibility?

Heh.


Contributing:  I voted Libertarian, but after the election Bob Barr settled down to sling mud and make it apparent he was just a closet Republican, so I was kind of irritated.

[KaelGotDwarves]

I'd take that guy any day over Mao Zedong, one of the founders of the leftist ideology who murdered upwards of 5 million people.

How are any of the modern day liberals "Maoist"? Only China is maoist.

If you're looking for false equivalences we can all start calling each other fascists. That's why I laugh when people sling around "socialist" like some sort of epithet. It's a failure in logic, and just resorting to ad hominem attacks. It doesn't mean anything because people don't understand the history behind it.

Like how Republicans used to be liberal and socially progressive. They freed the slaves.

[lumin]

I'd take that guy any day over Mao Zedong, one of the founders of the leftist ideology who murdered upwards of 5 million people.

How are any of the modern day liberals "Maoist"? Only China is maoist.

The ideology of Mao (Marxism) is very much a part of modern day liberalism.  They should research a little bit of what you believe in.  Like I said, most liberals don't even know their history, that's why they shouldn't be able to vote.

But, hey if you want to call Stalin the true leader, I'm fine with that too.

[dreiche2]

Being outside, all you see is the extreme edge... that which makes newsworthy content... [...]

Didn't you just say you're not actually an active part of the movement either? Maybe it's you who's got the wrong impression of the movement?

lumin:

 

If you're looking for false equivalences we can all start calling each other fascists. It doesn't mean anything because people don't understand the history behind it.

Hey, I'm German, I know a little bit about fascism  . If you ask me, from what I have seen, calling the American liberals fascists, especially in comparison to American conservatives (at least the currently vocal ones), is extremely absurd.

[KaelGotDwarves]

The ideology of Mao (Marxism) is very much a part of modern day liberalism.  They should research a little bit of what you believe in.  Like I said, most liberals don't even know their history, that's why they shouldn't be able to vote.

But, hey if you want to call Stalin the true leader, I'm fine with that too.

What do you consider Marxist ideals?

If you consider the ideas that history is a long cycle of class warfare and that the rich use money and power to control the poor, then yes, you may label me a Marxist.

I don't think anyone here would condone Mao's or Stalin's actions, just as you wouldn't Hitler's. Anyone can warp an ideology and take it to it's extreme, which is bad. But the only one making those accusations are you.

What on earth do you think being progressive is about?

[kuro_suna]

I'd take that guy any day over Mao Zedong, one of the founders of the leftist ideology who murdered upwards of 5 million people.

How are any of the modern day liberals "Maoist"? Only China is maoist.

The ideology of Mao (Marxism) is very much a part of modern day liberalism.  They should research a little bit of what you believe in.  Like I said, most liberals don't even know their history, that's why they shouldn't be able to vote.

But, hey if you want to call Stalin the true leader, I'm fine with that too.

And this is the problem with the republicans, why bother actually practicing what you preach when you can just make a ass of yourself and then fall back on mcarthyist propaganda.

[Andir]

Like how Republicans used to be liberal and socially progressive. They freed the slaves.

If you get back to the roots of it, Republicans SHOULD stand for republic supporter.  That is of a republican nation with states rights and staunch supporters of the constitutional republic that was set up.  Democrats technically should fight for majority rights which you can sort of see with the Health care stance.  The Republican party has deviated so far from what someone who supports a republic should be doing that it's not funny anymore. (edit: they didn't free the slaves because it was a liberal notion... the Constitution applies to all men, not just to those of a certain upbringing...)

(To answer a question posed to me:  I consider myself libertarian, but not Libertarian or Tea.  [!note use of capitalization] I strongly weigh out the candidates that fit the ideals of a smaller federal footprint as I feel that the states should attempt legislation before we "make a federal case out of it."  That's the main reason I'm opposed to federal health care at this point.  I don't feel as though the states had enough power or legislation to do so.  This was partly due to the fact that Insurance companies were limited and protected as they were.)

[lumin]

The ideology of Mao (Marxism) is very much a part of modern day liberalism.  They should research a little bit of what you believe in.  Like I said, most liberals don't even know their history, that's why they shouldn't be able to vote.

But, hey if you want to call Stalin the true leader, I'm fine with that too.

What do you consider Marxist ideals?

If you consider the ideas that history is a long cycle of class warfare and that the rich use money and power to control the poor, then yes, you may label me a Marxist.

Good.  We are in agreement then.  I'll take the dude with the sign as my leader and you can have Mao and Stalin as yours.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

Why should we vote libertarian?  Why can't we elect Republicans that believe in fiscal responsibility?

The fiscal responsibility that fucked up the financial world?

And all liberals need to shut up, period.  Like I said, they are completely uneducated.  My guess is that most of them are young and naive, still live with their parents, are not married and have no real world experience.  Kind of reminds me of Obama: he never held a real job and is young and very naive.

For a start, Obama is only young compared to most politicians I know of in the US, and I believe he was a senator for a good few years. Certainly longer than you. Your sweeping generalizations about "liberals" remind me very much of McCarthy, and do nothing to make anyone who isn't a diehard super-conservative listen to you. Also, liberals are not all teenage fake communists, many, if not most liberals are highly educated, middle class moderates.

I'd like to test my theory, how many who support the health care bill on this forum are still "dependents" of their parents?

Almost certainly not as many as you think. Also your most recent post makes me think you must be a troll.
I also don't associate liberalism with dangerous maoist/marxists, I associate it to competent moderates like Lloyd George and William Gladstone, possibly two of the most capable leaders of the United Kingdom. Amusingly, your country was founded on very liberal and progressive ideals.