I agree. My question was rhetorical as I don't believe in calling anyone names based simply on some comments or votes. Hate the comments but not the person. Anymore I am happy if I agree with a candidate 60%. Not sure that Trump broke 40% approval from me.I have never supported a candidate who I agreed with 100%.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Mmmmm....
Judging from the stuff that has been written over the years here at DP, a liberal is someone who has a mental disorder that has never ever used a bar of soap. They hate Jesus but worship Gorge Soros and Mike Moore, and love all the gays -- even the ones that are more flaming than a pair of Richard Simmonds sequinned shorts. Despite being dependent on welfare, they all own luxuries like refrigerators and TVs. They own the media and that is why lefty politicians always win elections. They absolutely hate business, and have big hard-ons for rules and regulations and think women should be in a room other than the kitchen. The hate America, love commies and Muslims, and eat aborted fetuses on their morning toast. Sad!
I can't say that I have not met liberals like that and conservatives like that but you should understand that you are grossly exaggerating. A lot of people who call themselves liberals absolutely hate anyone who disagrees with them and dehumanize them. Hillary claimed to be a liberal yet called people deplorables. The people protesting speakers at Berkeley apparently call themselves liberal or progressive yet clearly fit your definition of conservatives.
DC waitress overwhelmed by message, tip left by Trump supporters
DC waitress overwhelmed by message, tip left by Trump supporters | Fox News
“We may come from different cultures and may disagree on certain issues, but if everyone would share their smile and kindness like your beautiful smile, our country will come together as one people. Not race. Not gender. Just American. God Bless!"
Thank you for illustrating the fallacy of my point. These Conservative Texans left a LIBERAL tip. All Cheers to kindness and generosity!
Corrected for accuracy.
Not really interested in playing semantic games. A lot of people would call her liberal and a lot of self described liberals voted for her. She called herself a progressive once so I guess that puts her in with Teddy Roosevelt's "wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand". So she is, as you are, a conservative. I would call her a fascist, along with the ironically named antifa.Do you unknowingly make things up to fit your misconceptions and false narrative? Please provide some credible evidence of 1. Hillary calling herself a liberal... and 2. Protesters at Berkeley calling themselves Liberals or Progressives. I do not expect you to produce evidence. If you did provide evidence, you would still have another hurdle to validate your point. Some people misidentify their ideology.
Not really interested in playing semantic games. A lot of people would call her liberal and a lot of self described liberals voted for her. She called herself a progressive once so I guess that puts her in with Teddy Roosevelt's "wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand". So she is, as you are, a conservative. I would call her a fascist, along with the ironically named antifa.
Who has the right to define these terms?
Glad to hear that you were tongue in cheek on your definitions. I have increasing trouble understanding why we talk about extreme right to extreme left when a more interesting spectrum is between libertarian/anarchist/individualism to statism/govt control/authoritarianism. It is easy for Hillary to go from Goldwater Girl to where she is now and it is hard to determine whether National Socialism should be on the right or the left. Government control is government control and classical liberalism seems to be on the far right with the state staying out of the way of the individual.An ideological spectrum runs from Extreme Left to Extreme Right. Neither side can lay claim to ethical or moral superiority. Each side has a tiny element of undesirable misfits.
Hillary, an old school democrat, has craved political power her entire adult life. She could not electrify a base or put together a winning coalition of voters. Trump, in spite of his boorish personalty, succeeded at becoming POTUS. I have to respect that. IMO, neither Hillary nor Trump embody Liberal or Conservative ideology. Hillary steers a bit more principled course. Trump wreaks of crass opportunism.
I wrote my definitions of Liberal and Conservative tongue-in-cheek. Ultimately in life, I want to serve those I Love with heaping doses of Grace, Honor, Humor and Love. Feel some Love! Don't take Life too serious. None of us get out of it alive.
I appreciate humor. When you took liberty with my words, you engaged in Liberalism.
After many years of evidenciary observations I have distilled this subject into two large camps.
Those who think it is ok to take resources from one group of people and give those resources to another group (including themselves) without consent.
The why does not seem to matter whether to farm obligation like buying voters or even due to a feeling of wanting to help out a legitimately troubled group.
And those who...do...not. Here are the constitutionalists.
Davy Crockett on Government Welfare
. . . .
Or for a slightly older perspective:
"The Remissness of our People in Paying Taxes is highly blameable; the Unwillingness to pay them is still more so. I see, in some Resolutions of Town Meetings, a Remonstrance against giving Congress a Power to take, as they call it, the People's Money out of their Pockets, tho' only to pay the Interest and Principal of Debts duly contracted. They seem to mistake the Point. Money, justly due from the People, is their Creditors' Money, and no longer the Money of the People, who, if they withold it, should be compell'd to pay by some Law.
"All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it."
Benjamin Franklin to Robert Morris
25 Dec. 1783
... or what is liberalism?
Anyone who reads my profile will see that I identify myself as "very liberal". But what does that mean?
What is a liberal?
For me, a liberal believes in:
If this list looks short, it's that way on purpose: I am hungry.
- the right of self determination, including
- democratic governance (not only that the government is determined democratically, but that the government exists democratically for the sole benefit of those who determine it - of the people, by the people, for the people,
- nationhood as a means for protecting welfare and promoting collective goals,
- the rights of people to improve their lives,
- the right to be armed - or to possess the means, or access to the means, for protecting oneself,
- freedom of speech and thought
- individual equality under the law, dependent on
- the predictable and fair application of laws (rule of law), especially the principle that laws only apply to (and by extension offer protections to) the people who determine those laws (part of 'fair application'),
- indifference of the law to traits such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.
- freedom of speech and thought
Discuss.
And Liberals often get angry and lob ad hominem attacks when they don't have an argument because they're generally more emotional than logical.
Irony quote of the day.
Wow, what a generalization!To help those of you confused over differences between Liberals and Conservatives, I have provided a brief description of both.
Liberals:
-tip generously, wait longer between haircuts and lawn cuts, take life in stride, help strangers, put others ahead of themselves, spew love and peace, smile a lot, have an optimistic and inclusive attitude, make hard work look easy, and focus on the common welfare for the benefit of the most people.
Conservatives, on the other hand:
- have a stingy and judgmental nature, insist on conformity, focus on criticizing other people's values instead of their own, show strangers disdain, glorify themselves, spew hate and discord, frown a lot, have a pessimistic and exclusionary attitude, a sense of entitlement and couldn't give a rat's ass about the common welfare.
What is a liberal?
Hard to say these days as the term has been bastardized.
There are currently two types of liberals.....
1. The Classical Liberal that the Founders of this country could be identified. The basics of Conservativism, such as Federalism, States' Rights, individualism, limited Federal government, personal responsibility, and the enforcement of the Rule of Law is more in align with a Classical Liberal than what the definition of liberal means today.
2. Today's definition of a liberal is the Welfare Liberal. One who puts its trust in a centralized government that squelches the rights of states and destroys the personal responsibility of states to provide for their own citizens. States now have become welfare recipients of the federal government in order to stay afloat and with every federal dollar they receive there is a bit of their own sovereignty that they relinquish . Welfare liberals are all for spread the wealth schemes, the redistribution of wealth.....a socialistic approach which actually destroys the one thing this Free Republic was established on and that is for each citizen to have the opportunities to make for themselves the best life possible on their own. It was all about choices.
But the very institutions in our society that encouraged good choices, the lefties have gone about destroying them.
So a liberal today is a basterdized version of what it once meant. So much so, the left is now identifying itself as "Progressives" which equates to socialists. It truly started with Woodrow Wilson during the Progressive era. He was a closet socialist elite and the damage that man put into motion a century ago, we are now fully reaping to the point we could lose our free republic. Ironically during the Progressive Era, the Socialist party was well engaged during the beginning of the 20th century. But after the election of Woodrow Wilson they faded into the background as they had found a friend in Woodrow and stayed there working in the shadows until the last couple of decades where the Socialists, Communists came out in force openly to support the Democratic party. They have managed to pull the Democratic party very far left of center.
Personally if you truly believe in liberty and freedom you can not be a progressive, a current day version of a liberal, leftist etc.....because you do not believe in individualism but rather collectivism.
To help those of you confused over differences between Liberals and Conservatives, I have provided a brief description of both.
Liberals:
-tip generously,
What is a liberal?
Hard to say these days as the term has been bastardized.
There are currently two types of liberals.....
1. The Classical Liberal that the Founders of this country could be identified. The basics of Conservativism, such as Federalism, States' Rights, individualism, limited Federal government, personal responsibility, and the enforcement of the Rule of Law is more in align with a Classical Liberal than what the definition of liberal means today.
2. Today's definition of a liberal is the Welfare Liberal. One who puts its trust in a centralized government that squelches the rights of states and destroys the personal responsibility of states to provide for their own citizens. States now have become welfare recipients of the federal government in order to stay afloat and with every federal dollar they receive there is a bit of their own sovereignty that they relinquish . Welfare liberals are all for spread the wealth schemes, the redistribution of wealth.....a socialistic approach which actually destroys the one thing this Free Republic was established on and that is for each citizen to have the opportunities to make for themselves the best life possible on their own. It was all about choices.
But the very institutions in our society that encouraged good choices, the lefties have gone about destroying them.
So a liberal today is a basterdized version of what it once meant. So much so, the left is now identifying itself as "Progressives" which equates to socialists. It truly started with Woodrow Wilson during the Progressive era. He was a closet socialist elite and the damage that man put into motion a century ago, we are now fully reaping to the point we could lose our free republic. Ironically during the Progressive Era, the Socialist party was well engaged during the beginning of the 20th century. But after the election of Woodrow Wilson they faded into the background as they had found a friend in Woodrow and stayed there working in the shadows until the last couple of decades where the Socialists, Communists came out in force openly to support the Democratic party. They have managed to pull the Democratic party very far left of center.
Personally if you truly believe in liberty and freedom you can not be a progressive, a current day version of a liberal, leftist etc.....because you do not believe in individualism but rather collectivism.
HItler Stalin Mao FDR and Bernie Sanders would agree!using the state to better society and to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to succeed in life.
Fundamental to welfare state liberalism is equality of opportunity
I see you have a fundamental misunderstanding of welfare state liberalism,
To help those of you confused over differences between Liberals and Conservatives, I have provided a brief description of both.
Liberals:
-tip generously, wait longer between haircuts and lawn cuts, take life in stride, help strangers, put others ahead of themselves, spew love and peace, smile a lot, have an optimistic and inclusive attitude, make hard work look easy, and focus on the common welfare for the benefit of the most people.
Conservatives, on the other hand:
- have a stingy and judgmental nature, insist on conformity, focus on criticizing other people's values instead of their own, show strangers disdain, glorify themselves, spew hate and discord, frown a lot, have a pessimistic and exclusionary attitude, a sense of entitlement and couldn't give a rat's ass about the common welfare.
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?