Liberal Forum

nuckin futz » 01 Jul 2017 9:27 pm » wrote: Rinse, wash, repeat! Same old ****!

Correct!! I get tired of the Democrat Fake News aka LIES being spread as gospel by Misty and other progressives. That is the **** I keep trying to wash away.

Sgt Bilko » 04 Jul 2017 4:16 am » wrote: Correct!! I get tired of the Democrat Fake News aka LIES being spread as gospel by Misty and other progressives. That is the **** I keep trying to wash away.

Stop wallowing in ****, and you wont have to wash it away!

(I'm trying to be helpful here, son!)

nuckin futz » 04 Jul 2017 10:11 am » wrote: Stop wallowing in ****, and you wont have to wash it away!

(I'm trying to be helpful here, son!)

The problem is it is all over this site and the media. Can't avoid it. Democrats have been telling whoppers for so many years. I witnessed this on CSPAN when it first started up. A Republican would make a statement and the Democrat response was a lie about what he said. Happened over and over. That made a believer of me that when a Democrat's lips move they are lying. This seemed to start when progressives took over the Democrat Party and liberals ended up in the conservative side.

Sgt Bilko » 04 Jul 2017 7:17 pm » wrote: The problem is it is all over this site and the media. Can't avoid it. Democrats have been telling whoppers for so many years. I witnessed this on CSPAN when it first started up. A Republican would make a statement and the Democrat response was a lie about what he said. Happened over and over. That made a believer of me that when a Democrat's lips move they are lying. This seemed to start when progressives took over the Democrat Party and liberals ended up in the conservative side.

When did Progs take over the Dem party?

And how is a prof different from a liberal?

And now liberals are conservatives?

YOU ARE VERY CONFUSED!

nuckin futz » 04 Jul 2017 8:17 pm » wrote: When did Progs take over the Dem party?

And how is a prof different from a liberal?

And now liberals are conservatives?

YOU ARE VERY CONFUSED!

Classical Liberalism vs. Progressive Liberalism
By BCL from Being Classically Liberal link Mar 19, 2016

https://beingclassicallyliberal.liberty ... iberalism/

Since its emergence in the 19th century, classical liberalism has principally advocated that every individual has the natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and that the function of government is to protect these rights. As the result of their belief in Lockean natural rights, classical liberals have been strong proponents of individual liberty in the political, social, and economic spheres.

In the economic realm, classical liberals advocate the free market economy, because, as noted by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “unless people are free to make contracts and to sell their labour, or unless they are free to save their incomes and then invest them as they see fit, or unless they are free to run enterprises when they have obtained the capital, they are not really free.” In the political and social realms, classical liberals have been the greatest advocates of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and so on.

In contrast, progressive liberalism principally advocates egalitarianism and ‘social justice.’ Progressive liberals believe themselves to be defenders of minorities and the downtrodden. They seek to eliminate society of political, social, and economic inequalities. Seemingly, this is a distinction without a difference, as one can advocate both liberty and equality simultaneously. However, there is a substantive difference between classical and progressive liberals, and it comes down to what they believe the role of government is.

By definition, the state is effectively a legal monopoly on the use of force. No private individual, business, or organization can compel anyone to do anything against their will, but the state can. Classical liberals consequently see the state as, at best, a necessary evil whose coercive powers should be utilized as infrequently as possible. In stark contrast, progressive liberals believe in utilizing the state frequently and extensively as a means to force society to change in accordance with egalitarian principles.

The differences between classical and progressive liberals can be illustrated through how they believe the government should respond to a number of socioeconomic issues. Consider income inequality. A classical liberal who wishes for a more equitable income distribution would encourage the wealthy to donate their money to those in need.

On the other hand, a progressive will use the state to forcefully confiscate, via confiscatory taxation, money away from the wealthy individuals who earned it and then redistribute to the poor while congratulating themselves on their selflessness and castigating the person they stole from as greedy if they raised any objections.

Also consider social welfare schemes like social security, a program devised by progressives which all workers are forced, by the government, to pay a considerable percentage of their income to in order to ensure all said workers are able to retiree when they are older. Progressives love this system so much that they are adamantly opposed to the classical liberal proposition of allowing workers to opt out of it so that they can manage their own money as they see fit.

When Christian bakers in Oregon refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple because it violated their religious beliefs, they were sued and forced to pay $135,000 in compensation to the couple for discrimination. Classical liberals lamented this outcome, as they don’t believe that people should be forced, by law, to associate with others against their will, with rare exceptions. But progressive liberals, on the other hand, celebrated. In their minds, forcing people to act in accordance with their social justice ideology is perfectly fine, and not doing so actually constitutes a crime.

Lastly, consider freedom of speech. While classical liberals will denounce racists but nonetheless support their right to speak, progressives have become increasingly supportive of using the government to censor opinions they disapprove of. The majority of democrats, for example, now support a law which would make hate speech a punishable crime and 35% of them think that statements which are offensive to minorities should be censored by the government (compared to 18% of Republicans.)

In nearly every case, progressive liberals are more likely to support using the coercive power of the state to force society to be structured according to their will, and yet somehow they see themselves as good and just for doing so.

Most classical liberals personally hold all the values progressives do. They believe that racism and sexism are terrible and wish them to be banished from society. They wish for an end to inequality, and so on. But they do not believe that just because they personally think a rich man should give his money to the poor, he must be compelled to do so under penalty of lawful retribution. Nor do they believe that Christian bakers should be forced to serve gay couples, against their will. Nor do they believe racists should have their speech censored, even though what they say is toxic.

Classical liberals believe that society should avoid using coercive institutions, like the state, in order to change itself for the better. Instead, open debate, social pressures, and other voluntary means should be used to promote societal progress. A free society should utilize coercion as little as possible. Classical liberals believe that is the morally just position, not the one taken by many progressives.

Classical Liberalism has been incorporated into conservative principles partly because of the progressive movement creating a deep divide between it and Progressiveism.

Sgt Bilko » 04 Jul 2017 9:13 pm » wrote: Classical Liberalism vs. Progressive Liberalism
By BCL from Being Classically Liberal link Mar 19, 2016

https://beingclassicallyliberal.liberty ... iberalism/

Since its emergence in the 19th century, classical liberalism has principally advocated that every individual has the natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and that the function of government is to protect these rights. As the result of their belief in Lockean natural rights, classical liberals have been strong proponents of individual liberty in the political, social, and economic spheres.

In the economic realm, classical liberals advocate the free market economy, because, as noted by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “unless people are free to make contracts and to sell their labour, or unless they are free to save their incomes and then invest them as they see fit, or unless they are free to run enterprises when they have obtained the capital, they are not really free.” In the political and social realms, classical liberals have been the greatest advocates of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and so on.

In contrast, progressive liberalism principally advocates egalitarianism and ‘social justice.’ Progressive liberals believe themselves to be defenders of minorities and the downtrodden. They seek to eliminate society of political, social, and economic inequalities. Seemingly, this is a distinction without a difference, as one can advocate both liberty and equality simultaneously. However, there is a substantive difference between classical and progressive liberals, and it comes down to what they believe the role of government is.

By definition, the state is effectively a legal monopoly on the use of force. No private individual, business, or organization can compel anyone to do anything against their will, but the state can. Classical liberals consequently see the state as, at best, a necessary evil whose coercive powers should be utilized as infrequently as possible. In stark contrast, progressive liberals believe in utilizing the state frequently and extensively as a means to force society to change in accordance with egalitarian principles.

The differences between classical and progressive liberals can be illustrated through how they believe the government should respond to a number of socioeconomic issues. Consider income inequality. A classical liberal who wishes for a more equitable income distribution would encourage the wealthy to donate their money to those in need.

On the other hand, a progressive will use the state to forcefully confiscate, via confiscatory taxation, money away from the wealthy individuals who earned it and then redistribute to the poor while congratulating themselves on their selflessness and castigating the person they stole from as greedy if they raised any objections.

Also consider social welfare schemes like social security, a program devised by progressives which all workers are forced, by the government, to pay a considerable percentage of their income to in order to ensure all said workers are able to retiree when they are older. Progressives love this system so much that they are adamantly opposed to the classical liberal proposition of allowing workers to opt out of it so that they can manage their own money as they see fit.

When Christian bakers in Oregon refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple because it violated their religious beliefs, they were sued and forced to pay $135,000 in compensation to the couple for discrimination. Classical liberals lamented this outcome, as they don’t believe that people should be forced, by law, to associate with others against their will, with rare exceptions. But progressive liberals, on the other hand, celebrated. In their minds, forcing people to act in accordance with their social justice ideology is perfectly fine, and not doing so actually constitutes a crime.

Lastly, consider freedom of speech. While classical liberals will denounce racists but nonetheless support their right to speak, progressives have become increasingly supportive of using the government to censor opinions they disapprove of. The majority of democrats, for example, now support a law which would make hate speech a punishable crime and 35% of them think that statements which are offensive to minorities should be censored by the government (compared to 18% of Republicans.)

In nearly every case, progressive liberals are more likely to support using the coercive power of the state to force society to be structured according to their will, and yet somehow they see themselves as good and just for doing so.

Most classical liberals personally hold all the values progressives do. They believe that racism and sexism are terrible and wish them to be banished from society. They wish for an end to inequality, and so on. But they do not believe that just because they personally think a rich man should give his money to the poor, he must be compelled to do so under penalty of lawful retribution. Nor do they believe that Christian bakers should be forced to serve gay couples, against their will. Nor do they believe racists should have their speech censored, even though what they say is toxic.

Classical liberals believe that society should avoid using coercive institutions, like the state, in order to change itself for the better. Instead, open debate, social pressures, and other voluntary means should be used to promote societal progress. A free society should utilize coercion as little as possible. Classical liberals believe that is the morally just position, not the one taken by many progressives.

Classical Liberalism has been incorporated into conservative principles partly because of the progressive movement creating a deep divide between it and Progressiveism.

I am more of a Classic Liberal with a bent towards libertarianism.

I disagree with the last statement; "the progressive movement creating a deep divide between it and progressivism" That does not make any sense at all. And modern conservatism HAS NOT adopted any of the Classic liberalism as I see it!
Modern conservatism exists to serve the ultra elite and huge corporations and make them richer, and does not incorporate 'the common people's interests as such!

nuckin futz » 05 Jul 2017 9:47 am » wrote: I am more of a Classic Liberal with a bent towards libertarianism.

I disagree with the last statement; "the progressive movement creating a deep divide between it and progressivism" That does not make any sense at all. And modern conservatism HAS NOT adopted any of the Classic liberalism as I see it!
Modern conservatism exists to serve the ultra elite and huge corporations and make them richer, and does not incorporate 'the common people's interests as such!

Liberalism Defined

http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/americas-2nd ... jLZe82l.99

There are those on both the left and right who call for American unity. But these calls are either naive or disingenuous. Unity was possible between the right and liberals, but not between the right and the left.

Liberalism – which was anti-left, pro-American and deeply committed to the Judeo-Christian foundations of America; and which regarded the melting pot as the American ideal, fought for free speech for its opponents, regarded Western civilization as the greatest moral and artistic human achievement and viewed the celebration of racial identity as racism – is now affirmed almost exclusively on the right and among a handful of people who don’t call themselves conservative.

Our founding fathers were liberal. One of the last real liberals is Joe Lieberman!

Sgt Bilko » 05 Jul 2017 10:28 am » wrote: Liberalism Defined

http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/americas-2nd ... jLZe82l.99

There are those on both the left and right who call for American unity. But these calls are either naive or disingenuous. Unity was possible between the right and liberals, but not between the right and the left.

Liberalism – which was anti-left, pro-American and deeply committed to the Judeo-Christian foundations of America; and which regarded the melting pot as the American ideal, fought for free speech for its opponents, regarded Western civilization as the greatest moral and artistic human achievement and viewed the celebration of racial identity as racism – is now affirmed almost exclusively on the right and among a handful of people who don’t call themselves conservative.

Our founding fathers were liberal. One of the last real liberals is Joe Lieberman!

More HOGWASH from the Cheif Brainwashed!

Joe LIEberman??WTF?

Misty » 02 Jul 2017 10:32 am » wrote:T-Bag now advocating violence against CNN in yet another childish Tweet.

How very presidential of him.

I didn't see any advocacy of violence, liar.

Except to those with no sense of humor, as you have dishonestly claimed I lack.

Termin8tor » 05 Jul 2017 4:09 pm » wrote: I didn't see any advocacy of violence, liar.

Except to those with no sense of humor, as you have dishonestly claimed I lack.

It is only humor if a lefty does it.

Huey » 05 Jul 2017 4:46 pm » wrote: It is only humor if a lefty does it.

Cutting Trump's head off in a play to which liberals cheer is not an advocacy to violence.

Holding up Trump's bloody head is not an advocacy to violence.


But a silly fake wrestling video is.

Liberals are deranged.

Trump heads to foreign soil, promptly bashes two ex-presidents and his own intelligence community.

At a news conference with Polish President Andrzej Duda in Warsaw, Trump said that he thought Russia was behind the hacking, but then he repeatedly qualified it by saying he couldn't be sure.

He noted that the intelligence community has been wrong before and bashed the Iraq War.

And he suggested that President Barack Obama deliberately didn't address Russia's hacking for political reasons.

All of this was done with the world watching, on foreign soil.

Imagine if Duda came here and suggested Polish intelligence was flawed and unreliable, or if British Prime Minister Theresa May visited and talked about David Cameron's biggest failures as leader of that country.

Trump basically did all of that Thursday.

If Obama had done that, heads would be spinning.

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 10:25 am » wrote:Cutting Trump's head off in a play to which liberals cheer is not an advocacy to violence.

I see you're not very familiar with Shakespeare.

You're conflating the Julius Caesar/Shakespeare in the park play with the Kathy Griffin severed head pic.
Julius Caesar's head was not cut off. He was stabbed.

Also, you seem to ignore the fact that the assassination of Caesar in the play comes off as a despicable act with disastrous consequences.
Shakespeare's whole point was that violence is never an appropriate response.
The power vacuum created by Caesar’s assassination sparks a riot by the people and ultimately leads to a civil war.
Brutus and Cassius lose, and ultimately kill themselves.

BTW, Were you outraged when Julius Caesar was played by a black man resembling Barack Obama in 2012?

And FYI, no one 'cheered' the Kathy Griffin severed head pic.
I don't know anyone who said that was in good taste.
And she paid a price for it.
She was fired from CNN's New Year's Eve show, and it will likely hurt her stand up career very badly.
Cheeto The Tweeto is never held accountable for anything.

Misty » 06 Jul 2017 3:33 pm » wrote:you seem to ignore the fact that the assassination of Caesar in the play comes off as a despicable act with disastrous consequences.
Shakespeare's whole point was that violence is never an appropriate response.
The power vacuum created by Caesar’s assassination sparks a riot by the people and ultimately leads to a civil war.
Brutus and Cassius lose, and ultimately kill themselves.

Oh, so the liberals attending the play cheered Trump's murder because they anticipated the disaster?

The MSM fawned all over the play for the same reason?

As usual you're factually accurate to some degree but totally absurd in your overall point.

Misty » 06 Jul 2017 3:33 pm » wrote:BTW, Were you outraged when Julius Caesar was played by a black man resembling Barack Obama in 2012?

Had conservatives stood and cheered, I'd have been appalled.

And FYI, no one 'cheered' the Kathy Griffin severed head pic.
I don't know anyone who said that was in good taste.
And she paid a price for it.
She was fired from CNN's New Year's Eve show, and it will likely hurt her stand up career very badly.

Had conservatives not immediately reacted angrily, she'd haven been met with approval and support from your side.

Your side has a long, long history of such support. Say, speaking of appalling behavior, was Karl Rove ever frog-marched off to prison in an orange jump suit, as you predicted?

And what happened to that huge Russia-Trump conspiracy about which you babbled and shrieked for months?

Cheeto the Tweeto is overseas in Poland whining about the FAKE News media saying that what he wants is a 'fair' press.

New York Times columnist Frank Bruni points out that the president doesn't want a free or fair press, he wants a "fawning press."

Conflating the entertainment division with the news division, T-Bag thinks that because he made a lot of money for NBC, they should treat him better.

“What we want to see in the United States is honest – beautiful, free – but honest press,” Mr Trump said.

“We want to see fair press. I think it’s a very important thing.

We don’t want fake news. By the way, not everybody is fake news, but we don’t want fake news.

Bad thing. Very bad for our country.”

During the press conference, Mr Trump added that “NBC is equally as bad” as CNN, “despite the fact that I made them a fortune with 'The Apprentice', but they forgot that.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/trump ... 27751.html

T-Bag said that CNN has been fake news for a long time, and have been covering him in a very dishonest way.

He then turned to the Polish President to ask if he had this problem, completely unaware that Poland’s President Andrzej Duda has significantly cracked down on press freedoms in his country.

I guess Golf-T was too busy playing golf, watching TV and Tweeting to study up on what was going on in Poland before opening his stupid pie hole.

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 3:43 pm » wrote:Had conservatives stood and cheered, I'd have been appalled.

****.

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 3:43 pm » wrote:Had conservatives not immediately reacted angrily, she'd haven been met with approval and support from your side.

MORE ****.

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 3:43 pm » wrote:Your side has a long, long history of such support.

EVEN MORE ****.

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 3:43 pm » wrote:Say, speaking of appalling behavior, was Karl Rove ever frog-marched off to prison in an orange jump suit, as you predicted?

No. Was Obama ever frog-marched off to prison in an orange jump suit for his many crimes?

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 3:43 pm » wrote:And what happened to that huge Russia-Trump conspiracy about which you babbled and shrieked for months?

Unfortunately the guy who was talking about it died 10 days after he spoke to the WSJ.

Misty » 06 Jul 2017 6:53 pm » wrote:Cheeto the Tweeto is overseas in Poland whining about the FAKE News media saying that what he wants is a 'fair' press.

New York Times columnist Frank Bruni points out that the president doesn't want a free or fair press, he wants a "fawning press."

Conflating the entertainment division with the news division, T-Bag thinks that because he made a lot of money for NBC, they should treat him better.

They ought to be tough and objective. So?

How many times over the months the corrupt MSM covered the Russia collaboration non-story did they report that Trump was NOT under investigation?

I'll wait.

Why didn't they? Why were they reporting months and months of falsehoods and false insinuations?

T-Bag said that CNN has been fake news for a long time, and have been covering him in a very dishonest way.

Oh my gosh, Trump spoke honestly about that deeply corrupt network? Shocking!

Termin8tor » 06 Jul 2017 7:39 pm » wrote:Oh my gosh, Trump spoke honestly about that deeply corrupt network? Shocking!

Brainwashed idiot.

What is FAKE News?

Fake news is a type of yellow journalism that consists of deliberate misinformation or hoaxes spread via traditional print and broadcast news media or online social media.

Fake news is written and published with the intent to mislead in order to gain financially or politically, often with sensationalist, exaggerated, or patently false headlines that grab attention.

Go ahead jackass.
Tell me that's what CNN does.