aquapub
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 7,317
- Reaction score
- 344
- Location
- America (A.K.A., a red state)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
aquapub said:There is no greater enemy of civil liberties in America than your standard self-righteous, crusading liberal.
As with every famous world leader who ever called themselves something liberal (Stalin-Communist, Hitler-Nazi stands for National Socialist, Castro-Communist, Kim Jong Il-Communist, Hillary Clinton-Socialist), American liberals, EVERY TIME the chips are down, can be found siding against freedom (unless it is for child molesters or Muslim terrorists).
aquapub said:... Hitler-Nazi stands for National Socialist, Castro-Communist, Kim Jong Il-Communist ...
Really?Iriemon said:I think you are about the first person I have ever seen who tried to contend Hitler was a liberal.
aquapub said:The reason is that every time Republicans open up a magazine, turn on the news, watch a movie, or read the newspaper, conservative views are being outrageously and falsely smeared or excluded from the entire thing while liberal views are mindlessly regurgitated and propagandized for (some, like NPR and the NY Times require more thought to catch how much they stack the deck against conservative viewpoints because they apply an air of neutrality; they make phony “balance” statements to make things look evenly covered; they use sophisticated language and elaborately skewed poll numbers, but their agendas are well-evidenced and insanely left-wing).
aquapub said:Whether there are slightly more conservatives on this website or not has zero relevance to whether or not universities are liberal brainwashing centers.
This is not an American problem, it is demonstrably a liberal problem. O'Reilly and Hannity let the other side speak. Liberals who control nearly ALL universities and every allegedly objective media outlet except Fox conduct debates between moderate Democrats and extreme ones, often excluding the conservative view entirely.
aquapub said:"The standard thing is for them to say "See? It says socialist right there in the name- National Socialist Party."
To which I say, "Well North Korea must be democratic. See? It says democratic right in the name, Democratic People's Republic of Korea."-
Simon Moon
There are also few Christians who are anything like what Christianity stands for, but we judge Christianity by the actions of its followers, no matter how un-Christian they are.
Everyone who calls themselves something liberal (as listed in the previous post), including Democrats, push for things that horrifically violate civil liberties of people-unless those people are child molesters or terrorists, of course.
Also, Australian libertarian said:
"As for universities being liberal hotbeds, well it appears that there are just as many conservative uni students on this site as liberal uni students.
This rudeness of heckling over people is neither liberal or a conservative problem, but an American problem. Just watch O'Reilly, Hannity and Colmes, and all these programs show, are conservatives and liberals trying to out shout each other. Probably because neither side presents real data, but fall back on emotive rhetoric.
Lastly it really isn't that bad for Republicans, you've got the Whitehouse, Congress, and the Senate, what is there to complain about?"
Whether there are slightly more conservatives on this website or not has zero relevance to whether or not universities are liberal brainwashing centers.
This is not an American problem, it is demonstrably a liberal problem. O'Reilly and Hannity let the other side speak. Liberals who control nearly ALL universities and every allegedly objective media outlet except Fox conduct debates between moderate Democrats and extreme ones, often excluding the conservative view entirely.
Conservatives are law-abiding, answer to something higher than themselves and ACTUALLY care about freedom of political expression.
And Republicans winning elections in no way entitles the left to suppress free speech.
While your entire post shows a real mischaracterization of what liberalism actually is, it is this specific point which I wish to address.aquapub said:If Ann Coulter really is some right wing hack with nothing to say, than letting her speak would be the best way to defeat her. This is how I defeat liberals all the time. They are wrong, and I know it, so I let THEM disprove themselves. You only have to suppress speech when the speaker has a point to be reckoned with.
Liberals simply cannot handle Ann Coulter intellectually, so they prove her right and react with mindless, Neanderthal threats of violence, blatantly false personal attacks (Al Franken champions this particular feature-as I catalogued in another thread), and suppression of her speech.
Engimo said:While your entire post shows a real mischaracterization of what liberalism actually is, it is this specific point which I wish to address.
Listen, Coulter is a hack. She contributes nothing to real political dialogue and is entirely inflammatory. Just look at some of the things she says.
Now, while the behavior of those students was rather sophomoric and silly, they have reason to be angry. This is not a matter of letting Coulter speak, it's paying her to speak. Paying her a lot.
It cost the school $16,000 to have her come speak, you know, and that is a damned lot of money to be spent on someone with no legitimate contribution to the public sphere. The students have every right to be indignant about their tuition money being spent to have her come speak.
aquapub said:1) Liberalism in practice is about putting individual rights over individual responsibility; it is about the elites presuming that the least effective tool available to human kind-government bureaucracy-knows better than the individual and should be trusted to make as many decisions for the individual as is humanly possible. Liberalism asserts that the people are weak, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as its victim-the people-become reliant on the obscenely costly and endless government programs meant to protect people from themselves.
Liberalism has a unique ability to beautifully and efficiently solve problems in every kind of setting except reality. Human nature ALWAYS is the bane of liberal policies working.
I think I have a quite accurate perception of what liberalism is about.
2) Coulter's contribution is two fold. She reminds conservatives that they should be unapologetic about being on the right side of things and she provides mountains of ammunition for conservatives. OF COURSE YOU see her as making no real kind of contribution. But your fine with the school paying a totally unqualified, sleazy partisan (Sheehan) to use her dead son for a political smear campaign? THAT is contributing NOTHING real to the debate.
This is exactly what I am talking about with liberals. YOU don't value her judgment, so it wasn't that big of a deal that she received death threats and was not allowed to give the other side of the war debate. YOU don't get to decide for people what ACCEPTABLE speech is to allow. It is precisely this arrogance that leads liberals to constantly violate people's civil liberties in the pursuit of THEIR ideal world.
Labor unions violate your right to free assembly when they FORCE you to join and/or pay union dues (in the few cases in which you get to decide whether or not to join, you still have to pay, and ALL the money goes straight to Democrats-what if you oppose Democrats? You still have to give them money? What an outrage!) in order to get or keep a job.
They launch lawsuits to force Christians-and only Christians-to take down any religious symbols about Christmas, while making it so that kids have to recite the seven pillars of Islam to graduate the seventh grade (that ACTUALLY happened in a school district in California).
If you want to go to a university, you almost always have to pay money that will help obscenely biased professors propagandize for Democrats. THAT is FAR MORE outrageous to do with students' tuitions.
Engimo said:1) No, you don't.
2) When did I say that I approved of Sheehan being paid? You're putting words in my mouth, mister. I object to Sheehan as well. I find her to be overly radical and blatantly partisan, and I don't feel that she provides much contribution to debate.
3) The fact that I don't value her judgement is based on the fact that she is a demagogue and a partisan hack that genuinely produces no positive contribution to debate, not the fact that she is a right-winger. I think that Michael Moore (who is not nearly as bad as Coulter) is biased and partisan as well, and I object to many of the things that he says. It's not a matter of ideology, it's a matter of her being a terrible, terrible person that is entirely irrational. I have no problem with right-wingers as a whole, I have a problem with loudmouthed hacks.
4) What? Labor unions are private organizations, you realize. Last time I checked, the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to private organizations, only governmental institutions. Even if it may be de facto forcing you to join (which is not the case - especially as of late), there is no law on the books that forces you to join a labor union, in the same way that there is no law that forces you to register for a specific political party to get promotions in civil service occupations. My father, for example, was essentially forced to register as a Republican in order to get any advancement in his job. Is that corrupt? Yes. Is it illegal? No.
5) Yeah. Let's get that Christian Persecution Complex rolling! You know what we should do? Point out isolated incidents as examples of the actions and philosophies of an entire group of people! Hey, last time I checked, nearly every senior governmental official is a Christian, about 88% of the country is Christian, and Christian lobbying groups have huge political power. Not only that, I highly doubt the whole "Islam" thing, and if that is true, it is just as egregious a breach of the 1st Amendment as the institutionalization of Christianity and is guaranteed to not be supported by any sane person.
6) Also, look up the case history of the ACLU sometime, they sue on behalf of Christians more often than I wager you would think.
7) What? If you disagree with a professor's political views, you have absolutely every right to object to the university and argue with the professor (in the proper place, of course), or exercise your freedom of choice and simply do not attend the unviersity.
3) Michael Moore is worse than Coulter because his (like Franken's) works don't withstand ten seconds of serious scrutiny and fact-checking. Coulter ususally gets her facts right. Regardless of her value to YOU, she is an appropriate counterpart for Sheehan on the war, and her civil liberties are just as important.
4) If you are a carpenter and every carpenter job in all the land is unionized, and the Supreme Court has legitimized every one of these jobs forcing you to give money to Democrats to join, you have no choice but to pay Democrats. You bet your ass that's a violation of free assembly. Ask your liberal allies at the ACLU. And if your father was forced to do that then his rights were violated too (which I doubt actually happened) but 9x out of 10, it is liberals who do thing like this because they are always the ones who have to operate outside of public support. It is why liberals love the judicial branch so much. It is unaccountable to the people, hence, a friend of the left.
5) I'm sure there were people like you saying things like that to blacks in the 1960s too. But I have watched this happen my whole life. It is FAR from isolated, it is standard operating procedure for the left.
6) Based on your other assumptions and acts of bigotry on this thread, I don't trust anything you say about that.
Hoot said:Gee...maybe poor Ms. Coulter should take a lesson from Bush and get those pre-screened audiences?
I don't think universities are liberal hotbeds, I think they're truth hotbeds, and they resent someone coming in there and lying right to their face.
And let's face it, Ms. Coulter is a master at lying, distortion and manipulating facts.
It takes someone of the caliber of Peter Beinhart to wipe away the facade of heavy makeup and reveal the ignorant witch beneath! LOL
I've also seen that claim made quite often. Party names don't mean much. It's hard to expect much from aquapub.Simon W. Moon said:Really?
The first one?
I've seen this canard trotted out so many times that I've lost count. The standard thing is for them to say "See? It says socialist right there in the name- National Socialist Party."
To which I say, "Well North Korea must be democratic. See? It says democratic right in the name, Democratic People's Republic of Korea."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?