Can a Liberal explain this to me?

[Misterveritis]

Modern American liberalism is generally pretty statist ... that's a big reason I don't identify as a liberal. Authoritarianism runs pretty endemic with both parties.

Much to my surprise I agree with you. We have the party of massive government, the Democratic Party. And we have the party of really, really big government, the Establishment Republican Party.

What we need is a Federal Party who will restore the Constitution. The Article V fight is our last hope short of gunfire.

 

[Hard Truth]

I see. So you don't think the US has enemies. We would become an isolationist totalitarian state. That would be tantamount to suicide. National defense is one of those areas in which libertarians regard government as necessary. You guys showering yourselves with goodies? Not so much.

I did not advocate eliminating the military, just drastically reducing it, so that it is used only for defense, not for philosophical, religious, poltical or business goals. I only support foreign intervention when it has a liklihood of preventing genocidal-scale slaughter. The USA does not need to act as the world's policeman, we tend to do as much harm as good when we try to do it.

I never supported any position that is compatible with totalitarianism. I support free expression and democracy.

 

[Misterveritis]

That is the conservatives too

I suppose it depends on what one means.

Constitutional Conservatives believe that a Federal government, limited by a written Constitution, is the best means to secure both security and liberty for the people. What do you find to object to?

 

[cpwill]

".....Commentaries on origin
Fox News Channel commentator Juan Williams argues that the Tea Party movement emerged from the "ashes" of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.[65] Others have argued that the Koch brothers were essential in fostering the movement.[66][67] In 2013, a study published in the journal Tobacco Control concluded that organizations within the movement were connected with non-profit organizations that the tobacco industry and other corporate interests worked with and provided funding for,[68][69] including groups Citizens for a Sound Economy (founded by the Koch brothers).[70][71] Al Gore cited the study and said that the connections between "market fundamentalists", the tobacco industry and the Tea Party could be traced to a 1971 memo from tobacco lawyer Lewis F. Powell, Jr. who advocated more political power for corporations. Gore said that the Tea Party is an extension of this political strategy "to promote corporate profit at the expense of the public good."[72]

Early local protest eventsOn January 24, 2009, Trevor Leach, chairman of the Young Americans for Liberty in New York State organized a "Tea Party" to protest obesity taxes proposed by New York Governor David Paterson and call for fiscal responsibility on the part of the government. Several of the protesters wore Native American headdresses similar to the band of 18th century colonists who dumped tea in Boston Harbor to express outrage about British taxes.[73]

Some of the protests were partially in response to several Federal laws: the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,[74] the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,[75][76] and a series of healthcare reform bills.[77]

New York Times journalist Kate Zernike reported that leaders within the Tea Party credit Seattle blogger and conservative activist Keli Carender with organizing the first Tea Party in February 2009, although the term "Tea Party" was not used.[78] Other articles, written by Chris Good of The Atlantic[79] and NPR's Martin Kaste,[80] credit Carender as "one of the first" Tea Party organizers and state that she "organized some of the earliest Tea Party-style protests"....."
Tea Party movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although there was some conservative opposition to the first round of bailouts inititated by Bush, the Tea Party had no national visibility until the time that Obama's election appeared likely. The Tea Party has always focused on cutting government programs that benefit the poor and mostly exclude from criticism the wars, military-intelligence-law enforcement spending, farm subsidies or any other corporate subsidies, so they had little disagreement with Bush. Opposition to the Affordable Care Act was the position that gave them the most momentum. The Tea Party was primarilly a reaction to Obama's election, ACA and the second round of bailouts.

The movement that became the Tea Party started as opposition to Bush's Comprehensive Immigration Reform, and the Bailouts. I believe the Tea Party moniker became big after a rant by Rick Santelli that went viral.

 

[sookster]

This is my two cents, but I think the way things are going so far, and I am curious how the a republican based governmental body will operate, that the people in power are wanting to create a two class system at the very least. One way to ensure power, is to literally spy on conversations of people. If I start talking passionately to my father about revolution (which I do) and they listen onto it, they know to follow my actions. If I start to mobilize or organize, they can tag me as a terrorist and have a drone take me out. This administration and I think other administrations are going to follow regardless of ideology, are striving for ever more power. In progress for a world wide government, they need the vast majority of Americans discluding the ruling class, to be dependent upon the government. And you would basically have societies that are in the sci fi movies. The aristocracy and the poor. If you are born in the right family, you will have bliss beyond measure. If you are born on the other side, the only way you can survive is by the government.

With the actions that this administration is doing, that is where I think this is headed. So I am curious what a republican based body will do. Will they be true and try to restrict governmental power, or will they use political logic and fork tongue to make it seem they are for the people, yet they are expanding the power of the government. Only time will tell.

Whatever this interview/article/testimony is is someone just playing dumb and asking questions to get by. They aren't ever going to tell you what they really are planning upon doing. They want even more power.

And if we go to work every day, make dinner, take care of our kids, and then watch a movie or do whatever for pleasure, there will be no action against the government. I think the government knows they can do whatever they want if they follow a certain procedure.

Do I have absolute evidence of this? No. I am just trying to put things together. I hope I am wrong. Keep this in mind...

I saw a documentary where a scientist (not governmental) was able to track a person so accurately using the GPS information on their cell phone, they could tell what door they went in the building. Now if you add the government, they could probably scan inside the building and track you, and can probably hear everything that you say on your electronic device and not on your electronic device.

We are at that age people. They are ensuring that a revolt doesn't happen. Why? So they can expand power to a world vision that they want regardless of what we want.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Liberals don't want to suppress anyone's religion…

Liberals don't want the law used to stop you from saying anything we disagree with it…

No one intentuionally [sic] supports any policy that allows or encourages people capable of working living to live off government benefits for life…

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Were you against the Patriot at the time and the formation of the Homeland dept. AT THE TIME..anyone who spoke out was called out as unPatriotic so very few did, except you..

How long has it been since the traitor gave up lives??Is their a statute of limitations on Treason and will there be problems on down the line--of course there will

I prefer to stand with our people in the field, unlike you, you're right about that.. these belong to Cruz, Paul and the rest of the TEAts; sorry you can't run away from the GOP of Patriotism


Until I see a difference on the ballot, there is no difference..Just another political reality you Can'tor run away from..

First, your avoidance once again to provide evidence of your claims that snowden killed people is duly noted. If you step on your dick, just say you misspoke, don't try to talk yourself out of it, it's childish.

Second, it absolutely baffles me that you've called me a republican again, and told me that the sum of my positions makes me a republican. The only conclusion I can come to is that you're a highly uneducated individual that doesn't recognize the difference between libertarian and republican, and also has no idea whatsoever what I believe. You've built a cute little strawman to punch, and have given zero regard as to whether I actually believe any of it.

I am:
- an atheist
- a military isolationist (we should only be involved in conflicts that threaten our safety)
- as socially liberal as they come (everyone is created equal and everyone deserves equal rights, like SSM)
- a constitutionalist small government type (not just pretending to be one while supporting massive handouts in other areas)

It seems the only thing I have even remotely in common with republicans is that I say that I want a small government.

Now, when you're ready to stop this childish strawman bull**** you're pulling of "YOU'RE A REPUBLICAN YOU LOVED BUSH AND YOU JUST HATE OBAMA BECAUSE YOU'RE A REPUBLICAN", then maybe we could have a debate. Until then, I bid you adieu.

 

[cpwill]

First, your avoidance once again to provide evidence of your claims that snowden killed people is duly noted

:shrug: proving so would be almost impossible even if he had - however, we do know that multiple threat groups have now altered the way in which they communicate and plan in order to avoid the collection that we were previously able to keep on them. War is (at best) a zero-sum game; helping one side hurts the other.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

:shrug: proving so would be almost impossible even if he had - however, we do know that multiple threat groups have now altered the way in which they communicate and plan in order to avoid the collection that we were previously able to keep on them. War is (at best) a zero-sum game; helping one side hurts the other.

If the government is violating our rights we have a right to know about it. Giving up our privacy so that the government can chase ghosts is ridiculous. Though you're one of the biggest security > liberty types on DP.

Personally I prefer to not live in fear and have a respect for our citizens privacy.

 

[Hard Truth]

View attachment 67156631

prove it

 

[Bob Blaylock]

View attachment 67156631

prove it

Did you, or did you not, make the following statements?

Liberals don't want to suppress anyone's religion…

Liberals don't want the law used to stop you from saying anything we disagree with it…

No one intentuionally [sic] supports any policy that allows or encourages people capable of working living to live off government benefits for life…

Surely you know that these statements are blatantly, obviously false, yet it seems that you made them anyway.

What do you call someone who willfully says things that he knows to be false?

 

[Misterveritis]

Did you, or did you not, make the following statements?

​

Surely you know that these statements are blatantly, obviously false, yet it seems that you made them anyway.

What do you call someone who willfully says things that he knows to be false?

*I* call him Mr. President.

 

[Hard Truth]

Did you, or did you not, make the following statements?

​

Surely you know that these statements are blatantly, obviously false, yet it seems that you made them anyway.

What do you call someone who willfully says things that he knows to be false?

You have been misinformed by bad "news" reporting. Try and find a statement from a prominent liberal that contradicts my claims.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You have been misinformed by bad "news" reporting. Try and find a statement from a prominent liberal that contradicts my claims.

Well, we all know that incidents such as the one described here have nothing to do with liberalism, right?

 

[Hard Truth]

Well, we all know that incidents such as the one described here have nothing to do with liberalism, right?

That toy drive was "....part of “Samaritan’s Purse,” an international Christian based organization led by Franklin Graham, son of Evangelist Billy Graham..." It was not appropriate for a public school to favor one particular religious group over all others. If the particular religious group they chose was Muslim or Atheist you would have opposed it yourself. The school should have chosen to work with the popular Marines of firefighters toy drive and it would not have been an issue.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Why would it ever come as a surprise that a liberal wants to increase the power of government over the citizens? This is their bread and butter. Government is always more important than liberty.



Yes, libertarians are the ones who want a bigger more powerful government to violate more of our rights.. :roll: You should crack open a book once in a while.

And the fact that you labeled neo-cons and libertarians as wanting the same things pretty much verifies my point even further. They're not even in the same political universe.

Wrong. The Koch brothers who run/fund libertarian think tanks do take away power from some groups while ensuring more for themselves.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Wrong. The Koch brothers who run/fund libertarian think tanks do take away power from some groups while ensuring more for themselves.

Uh huh, sure. I guess I should believe you because you said so.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Uh huh, sure. I guess I should believe you because you said so.

They don't mind corporate welfare themselves but for the poor it's bad.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

They don't mind corporate welfare themselves but for the poor it's bad.

I don't think many poor people are getting corporate welfare.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

I don't think many poor people are getting corporate welfare.

I think you get the point. They help model laws in their favor and against the poor, working and middle class.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I don't think many poor people are getting corporate welfare.

That depends upon how you look at it. If a corporation (e.g. Walmart) can pay low wages, but their "poor" workers get welfare then the corporation benefits in two ways; their labor remains cheap and the "poor" workers still have money to spend on their goods/services.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

I think you get the point. They help model laws in their favor and against the poor, working and middle class.

Seeing as how you've presented zero facts or sources, no I don't suppose I've gotten any point.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Seeing as how you've presented zero facts or sources, no I don't suppose I've gotten any point.

One of my favorites is Koch's libertarian think tanks' promotion of the Keystone project which is largely reliant on eminent domain from family farmers and middle class land owners. Hmmmm, I find it highly suspect they care much about liberty. Just a power grab for corps including oil industry from those who don't have a fraction of the same money nor political influence. The antithesis of freedom/liberty. This only applies to some.

Here is Heritage supporting it: The Keystone Pipeline That Was Already Approved | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation
Cato: Keystone XL: Liberal Histrionics Answered with Conservative Histrionics | Cato Institute

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

And it only gets better....follow the money trail....

The report, Billionaires’ Carbon Bomb by think tank International Forum on Globalization (IFG) has found that David and Charles Koch, through their privately-owned oil supply and refining company, Koch Industries, own more than two million acres of land in Alberta, Canada, which would propel the brothers’ personal wealth and political power ever faster and upward.

IFG’s report reveals that Koch Industries’ role in KXL could generate potential profits of $100 billion, or one million more times than the average KXL workers’ wage over the lifetime of the project.

The brothers’ wealth would also see a total of $53 million in the pockets of groups and politicians who are pushing to fastrack the pipeline.

According to the report, Koch Industries has several profit streams all along the tar sands value chain from crude oil production on land holdings of Koch Exploration Canada in Alberta’s tar sands territory, to their 4,000 miles of pipeline operated by Koch Pipeline Company, to their lucrative oil derivatives dealing by Koch Supply and Trading.

- See more at: Keystone will create ?cash cow on steroids? for Koch brothers

 

[Grendel]

I would really like at least one of our devout Liberal members to explain this to me. How can one of the most staunch liberals in the US Senate, be in favor of making the NSA spying on US citizens legal??? Because that's what her bill before the Congress would do; make everything the NSA is doing, absolutely legal and beyond question or oversight.

Because she's corrupt. Just like everyone in Washington.