B-Large Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Left, right, what the difference? Our government spends and doesn't ask tax payers to cover it, which is what I find most frustrating. Liberals wants the government to do everything, provide everything and ignore example worldwide how poorly that works. Conservatives have proven a blind adherence to tax cuts no matter how much we spend and no matter how many wars we fight with trillion dollar price tags. Until were willing to seriously discuss the Scope of Federal power and programming were not going to see anything change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 The country is not moving Left................but the dems are. Progressives Can’t Seem to Stick to Any Principle . . . Except More Governmentby Jonah Goldberg FTA: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and countless other Democrats insisted they opposed same-sex marriage. Conservatives said they were lying. Democrats protested, often with great and haughty indignation. They said it was outrageous to question their commitment to traditional family values, religious principle, etc. And then, when the issue was ripe, they “evolved.” Now, I always believed that Obama and Clinton were liars when it came to gay marriage (and not just gay marriage). But even if that weren’t the case, it doesn’t change the fact that liberals can’t be relied upon to stick to any principle if that principle becomes remotely inconvenient. Except one: More government. Progressives are the car salesmen of the State, and there’s always more undercoating to sell. More government is the one indispensable conviction of modern progressivism. Everything else is up for negotiation. When they were asked about reducing government last night, we got the usual word fog about eliminating duplicative programs and other inefficiencies. I am in favor of that stuff too, of course. But cutting inefficiency has very, very little to do with reducing the size of government and may in fact increase the scope of government. {snip} We all know how many times the titular head of the Democratic party, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, has been asked to distinguish between socialism and whatever dog’s breakfast the Democratic party stands for. Clinton gets asked that question often as well, and usually responds with her patented “I Don’t Like Your Question So I Will Laugh To Distract You” Cackle®. For generations, if a conservative said there was no difference between Democrats and socialists (however defined!), liberal eyes would roll right out of their heads. Such statements were like gassy flares from the fever swamps of the cranky, crazy American Right. Even at the dawn of the Obama administration, this was still the case. Indeed, I wrote a perfectly reasonable and reasoned piece for Commentary asking, “What Kind of Socialist Is Barack Obama?” (My answer: a neo-socialist). Liberals tittered and scoffed. And now, because a septuagenarian (self-described) socialist is popular with the kids today, it is now verboten to suggest there is a difference between Democrats and socialists. Whatever socialism is — or isn’t — it hasn’t changed in the last ten months. What’s changed is the rigidity of liberal spines. They’ve gone from flexible to flaccid to liquefaction. And that’s why you can never trust them, even when you agree with them. They’ll always want more, because more is the only thing they really believe in. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431251/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-debate-progressives-government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 I was talking to one poster who starts with insults if he hears somethin he does not agree with. . I love the smell of irony in the morning. Reminds me of gator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 The term "liberal" had become tainted, so Woodrow Wilson chose to use the term "progressive" to self-describe him. That term became tainted during the Vietnam war era, and "liberal" came back in vogue. They went back to "progressive" to show their enlightenment around the Iraq war, but the term is trite. What are they "progressing" to? The answer is socialism. Democrats considered it a slander to be called a socialist, until Sanders has made it cool. You know, cool like a Che tee-shirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 A majority of Americans tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative, but apparently there is an increase in the former. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/0528/On-social-issues-Americans-are-more-liberal-than-ever-before.-What-s-behind-the-sudden-shift I won't be surprised to find a shift on economic values given the financial crisis, rising inequality, and a government that is plutocratic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 A majority of Americans tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative, but apparently there is an increase in the former That's the same thing as saying people want a bunch of free **** , but don't want to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 That's the same thing as saying people want a bunch of free **** , but don't want to pay for it. No it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 That's the same thing as saying people want a bunch of free **** , but don't want to pay for it. A good example of a person who is socially liberal and fiscally conservative would be if someone was pro-choice but was against taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 A good example of a person who is socially liberal and fiscally conservative would be if someone was pro-choice but was against taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. Another good example would be someone who wants "free healthcare" but doesn't want to raise taxes to fund it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 (edited) Another good example would be someone who wants "free healthcare" but doesn't want to raise taxes to fund it. No... That would be another poor example. Edited February 15, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Another good example would be someone who wants "free healthcare" but doesn't want to raise taxes to fund it. People who want "free healthcare" tend to not have a problem with raising taxes because taxes will be raised on somebody else to subsidize their health care It's a free human right when somebody else pays for it But you're a raysis for daring to complain when you're the one paying for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Another good example would be someone who wants "free healthcare" but doesn't want to raise taxes to fund it. You can't be for free health care and still be a fiscal conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) People who want "free healthcare" tend to not have a problem with raising taxes because taxes will be raised on somebody else to subsidize their health care It's a free human right when somebody else pays for it But you're a raysis for daring to complain when you're the one paying for it Most people don't won't free anything... But they do desire affordable ways to educate their children, treat their illness, etc... And decent stable jobs that help them to do that. Edited February 16, 2016 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Most people don't won't free anything... But they do desire affordable ways to educate their children, treat their illness, etc... And decent stable jobs that help them to do that. What do you mean by most? From what I've seen there are an awful lot of people that are living fairly decently and not working meaning they get everything for free. Take a drive through the poorer sections of town. Take a look at where they live, what they wear, what they eat, what talk and text on. Do this during a time of day when most of us are at work and ask them "so how do you pay for all this?" They'll likely laugh at you and call you a sucker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 What do you mean by most? From what I've seen there are an awful lot of people that are living fairly decently and not working meaning they get everything for free. Take a drive through the poorer sections of town. Take a look at where they live, what they wear, what they eat, what talk and text on. Do this during a time of day when most of us are at work and ask them "so how do you pay for all this?" They'll likely laugh at you and call you a sucker. Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 What do you mean by most? From what I've seen there are an awful lot of people that are living fairly decently and not working meaning they get everything for free. Take a drive through the poorer sections of town. Take a look at where they live, what they wear, what they eat, what talk and text on. Do this during a time of day when most of us are at work and ask them "so how do you pay for all this?" They'll likely laugh at you and call you a sucker. That's my in-laws. Though to be honest, some of their free **** isn't all it's cracked up to be. Their "free" "health care," for example...have one in-law who's basically been told "come back when your cancer's more advanced." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 That's my in-laws. Though to be honest, some of their free **** isn't all it's cracked up to be. Their "free" "health care," for example...have one in-law who's basically been told "come back when your cancer's more advanced." Yes but the issue with many of those people is they would rather not work even if the free stuff is really really ****ty compared to what they could get if they worked. That's the main difference between them and us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 What do you mean by most? From what I've seen there are an awful lot of people that are living fairly decently and not working meaning they get everything for free. Take a drive through the poorer sections of town. Take a look at where they live, what they wear, what they eat, what talk and text on. Do this during a time of day when most of us are at work and ask them "so how do you pay for all this?" They'll likely laugh at you and call you a sucker. So you took a drive-by scientific survey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 What do you mean by most? From what I've seen there are an awful lot of people that are living fairly decently and not working meaning they get everything for free. Take a drive through the poorer sections of town. Take a look at where they live, what they wear, what they eat, what talk and text on. Do this during a time of day when most of us are at work and ask them "so how do you pay for all this?" They'll likely laugh at you and call you a sucker. Drive through the poor section of town and see how nice it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 So you took a drive-by scientific survey? Drive by? Sure. Scientific? No. Do you think my assessment of what's going on in the poorer neighborhoods is out of line? Drive through the poor section of town and see how nice it is? Nicer than where they'd be living if they didn't have us paying for all their ****. But then they'd be forced to find work wouldn't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts