Support NeoGAF

[OG_Original Gamer]

I also would like to know why Republicans, think that everyone elses opinion is wrong and there's is right. I noticed this today while watching Scarborough today, and he seems to be obsessing over Fahrenheit 9/11. I'm wondering if he dreams about Michael Moore.

Republicans have been throwing around the word Liberal like its a another name for the Devil. So I'm curious to know what a Liberal is. And what make Liberals bad.

 

[Triumph]

Liberals are almost as bad as terrorists.

 

[Goreomedy]

Liberals are, come November, this country's salvation.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Liberals are almost as bad as terrorists.

Really or is that a joke. But seriously could you go into a little more detail.

 

[sefskillz]

college kids are liberals

 

[ItalianStallion]

I also would like to know why Republicans, think that everyone elses opinion is wrong and there's is right. I noticed this today while watching Scarborough today, and he seems to be obsessing over Fahrenheit 9/11. I'm wondering if he dreams about Michael Moore.

Republicans have been throwing around the word Liberal like its a another name for the Devil. So I'm curious to know what a Liberal is. And what make Liberals bad.

The generalization in your first post is killer, but it's usually not safe to fight fire with fire, so I'm not going to.

 

[SKluck]

Liberals are almost as bad as terrorists.

Liberals ARE terrorists.

 

[Triumph]

Liberals are, come November, this country's salvation.

Oh man, I needed a good laugh.

The left is sadly lazy. Not only that, but anyone who is a true champion of liberal causes realized long ago that the Democratic Party is not working for the people any longer. I am going to vote for Nader and feel absolutely, positively 100% CORRECT for doing so. Fuck the shitty corporate hegemony ruling our country. Neither party will change it because they both benefit from it. This has been consistently proven over the last 25 years.

 

[Tekky]

Today, a liberal is a conservative, and a conservative is a liberal.

One time, liberals used to be liberals, and conservatives used to be conservative.

However, now that conservatives are in power, they've become liberal, and vice-versa for the liberals.

 

[GDGF]

Liberals are more fun to party with.




(ba-dump ching!)

 

[Gruco]

This guy can.

Credit to tennin, I think, who originally posted the link....

 

[Mad Hatter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal

The word liberal, like liberty, derives from the Latin liber ("free"). In religion and politics, to be liberal is to be tolerant or open-minded, to favour freedom over control. In other words, a liberal is someone who adheres to the ideology of liberalism.


In the United States, liberal is sometimes used as an antonym for Conservative or a synonym for left-wing. There, it primarily refers to the New Deal variant of liberalism, emphasizing the positive role of the state. In most other countries, liberal may have quite an opposite meaning: for instance, in France a liberal is a right-wing or libertarian proponent of free markets.


Worldwide, there are many political parties that go by the name Liberal Party, but their ideological positions vary widely. For example, Australia's Liberal Party is generally characterized as following a conservative ideology, rather than a liberal one; the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan is also considered a right-wing party despite its name.

 

[Idle Will Kill]

Who cares about all these labels. Just look at the candidates and pick which one has the closest ideas to yours. No one is ever going to fit squarely into a specific group.

 

[Hsieh]

Liberals are opposite to Republicans in terms of political ideology and are repsented by the Green Party and left wing democrats. Their main political ideologies are:

-Fighting racial inequality
-Fighting class inequality
-Preserving the environment
-Anti-war
-Pro-abortion

 

[MIMIC]

The term "Liberal," as of late, means that you hate President Bush with a fiery passion; you sympathize with terrorists; and that you have degenerate, demoralizing values that contribute to the downward trend of America's attitude. In other words, you suck for not baa-baaing.

I'm George Bush, and I approve this message.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

The generalization in your first post is killer, but it's usually not safe to fight fire with fire, so I'm not going to.

Yeah I just noticed the generalization, but I haven't noticed this with Democrats, they seem to be more willing to consider other opinions instead of pushing theirs as the truth.

 

[Echoes of Pink]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal

Liberal tends to be associated with the Democratic party. The Republicans on the other hand are associated with being conservative. Its no wonder therefore that Republicans would make Liberals (democrats) out to be the worst thing imaginable. The same thing goes for the Dems though. Since they are the two dominant parties they are constantly fighting with each other.

Anyway, a liberal is a person who supports a progressive stance on social issues and such. For example, a liberal person would support gay marriage or more money for welfare. Liberals tend to be less religious orientated since their beliefs tend to oppose organized religions.

Well that was kinda general but I'm sorry, its late at night.

 

[Gattsu25]

Yeah I just noticed the generalization, but I haven't noticed this with Democrats, they seem to be more willing to consider other opinions instead of pushing theirs as the truth.

more generalization :b


In my eyes, Liberals are Democrats, though I prefer to call them the latter. Sad when I hear republicans/democrats refer to others as conservatives/liberals with so much hate that they spit the word out like it's a curse

 

[Triumph]

Who cares about all these labels. Just look at the candidates and pick which one has the closest ideas to yours. No one is ever going to fit squarely into a specific group.

The problem with that is that both major parties suck, and the majority of American voters are so stupid that they want to "pick a winner" instead of voting for the candidate that has the platform that most closely matches their beliefs.

I can't express how much shit I've gotten from my so called LIBERAL friends for supporting Nader this time around. But honestly, I don't give a fuck. The Democratic Party is no longer the champion of the working man, the downtrodden or the poor. They haven't been for nearly 25 years. But they continue to get the support of the labor unions, NAACP, Sierra club and other traditional liberal organizations. Why? Because they're not the Republicans.

Well, sorry, that isn't good enough. Appointing moderate to mildly liberal judges isn't good enough. Saying the environment is important but not mandating higher fuel efficiency standards for 8 years of a Democratic Presidency isn't good enough. Weakening corporate monpoly and welfare laws while cracking down on the working poor of the country isn't good enough. These are all things you would expect of a Republican Administration, but THEY ALL HAPPENED UNDER CLINTON. He didn't veto ANY of it, or get up and make an issue out of any of it. No, he signed it all into law and didn't raise a fuss. What a great Democratic President, huh?

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. I tell my friends that time and time again when they shout at me for voting for "the spoiler". You know what? I hope he spoils the election. The Democratic Party has shifted too far to the right, and it needs to feel a sting from the people who still give a shit about progressive issues. Fuck all the people who won't take a stand because "a 3rd party or independent will never win." You are all part of the problem.

 

[ItalianStallion]

Yeah I just noticed the generalization, but I haven't noticed this with Democrats, they seem to be more willing to consider other opinions instead of pushing theirs as the truth.

Your generalizing again, though. Although I hate generalizing, I am what they call a "republican" (Even though I don't like the Bush office, and I don't like some things that the Republican party is supposed to stand for). However, I am one Republican that you can safely say evaluates every opinion, rather than forcing mine upon someone. Usually, I don't even have an opinion until I consider all my options, anyway...

 

[ItalianStallion]

The problem with that is that both major parties suck, and the majority of American voters are so stupid that they want to "pick a winner" instead of voting for the candidate that has the platform that most closely matches their beliefs.

I can't express how much shit I've gotten from my so called LIBERAL friends for supporting Nader this time around. But honestly, I don't give a fuck. The Democratic Party is no longer the champion of the working man, the downtrodden or the poor. They haven't been for nearly 25 years. But they continue to get the support of the labor unions, NAACP, Sierra club and other traditional liberal organizations. Why? Because they're not the Republicans.

Well, sorry, that isn't good enough. Appointing moderate to mildly liberal judges isn't good enough. Saying the environment is important but not mandating higher fuel efficiency standards for 8 years of a Democratic Presidency isn't good enough. Weakening corporate monpoly and welfare laws while cracking down on the working poor of the country isn't good enough. These are all things you would expect of a Republican Administration, but THEY ALL HAPPENED UNDER CLINTON. He didn't veto ANY of it, or get up and make an issue out of any of it. No, he signed it all into law and didn't raise a fuss. What a great Democratic President, huh?

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. I tell my friends that time and time again when they shout at me for voting for "the spoiler". You know what? I hope he spoils the election. The Democratic Party has shifted too far to the right, and it needs to feel a sting from the people who still give a shit about progressive issues. Fuck all the people who won't take a stand because "a 3rd party or independent will never win." You are all part of the problem.

Hey. You kick ass. Your reasons are precisely why, for the first time I can ever vote in my life, I will be voting for Nadar.

 

[MIMIC]

REPUGlican!

DemoRAT!

LIEberal!

Neo-Con!

Right-wing! (Rightard)

Left-wing! (Leftist)

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

This guy can.

Credit to tennin, I think, who originally posted the link....

Thanks Gruco, I will most definitely be voting for Kerry and Edwards after reading that.

 

[etiolate]

Liberals are Politically Correct. Republicans are Morally Correct.

 

[Hitokage]

Uh, Republican is a political party. Liberalism is an ideological base. The two shouldn't be directly compared.

Raoul Duke: So much displeasure, yet you do nothing that will actually change anything.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

more generalization :b


In my eyes, Liberals are Democrats, though I prefer to call them the latter. Sad when I hear republicans/democrats refer to others as conservatives/liberals with so much hate that they spit the word out like it's a curse

I think its the label Republican, Democrats. Should have used the individuals in question. So I'll say O'reilly and Scarborough, oh, can't forget Hannity.

 

[Triumph]

Uh, Republican is a political party. Liberalism is an ideological base. The two shouldn't be directly compared.

Raoul Duke: So much displeasure, yet you do nothing that will actually change anything.

Not true! I have gathered over 200 signatures to get Ralph Nader on the Georgia ballot in November.

 

[Idle Will Kill]

I really want to learn about politics, the ideas behind all the parties, how they got started, etc. Is there any book out there that is a good, interesting read about this kind of stuff?

 

[Gruco]

The Georgia ballot definitely won't change anything

The only way I can see a vote for Nader being helpful is if his costing Dems elections gets them irritated enough to start taking voting reform seriously. So it could potentially help I guess, but I don't think that strategy survives a cost/benefit analysis.

 

[MIMIC]

I really want to learn about politics, the ideas behind all the parties, how they got started, etc. Is there any book out there that is a good, interesting read about this kind of stuff?

 

[Gruco]

I really want to learn about politics, the ideas behind all the parties, how they got started, etc. Is there any book out there that is a good, interesting read about this kind of stuff?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...002-7982173-3531203?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...t_1/002-7982173-3531203?v=glance&s=books&st=*

Haven't read either, so can't vouch too much. But definitely have the history and development ange covered, from what I understand.

 

[teh_pwn]

I don't think typical democrats are very different from typical repulicans. It's just that extremely liberal and conservative associate themselves with each party and are loud about it.

I'm an independent, and I sway back and forth on different issues. Not sure who I'm voting for. I don't like Bush's reasoning for war, but I despise Kerry's attempt to suck money out of everyone's wallets to provide everyone with "health care." That's just asking to bleed money with all the so-call epidemics we're "facing" and all the pills that we "need." Screw that shit. Pay for yourselves, biatches.

 

[ballhog]

A vote for Nader might as well be a vote for my grandmother, who is dead.

 

[Triumph]

A vote for Nader might as well be a vote for my grandmother, who is dead.

As long as people continue to think like that, they will be shackled by the two major parties to the corporate teat.

 

[ballhog]

As long as people continue to think like that, they will be shackled by the two major parties to the corporate teat.

I would like to see three parties as much as you, but this isn't the time. It just isn't going to happen. You can make a statement with you vote if you want, but that's all it's going to be.

 

[jiggle]

-Pro-abortion

Pro-choice

 

[Bebpo]

I would like to see three parties as much as you, but this isn't the time. It just isn't going to happen. You can make a statement with you vote if you want, but that's all it's going to be.

Exactly.

There are times when it's good to show that we want more than a 2 party system. IMHO these are the times when there aren't huge pressing issues that the country is dealing with. When the country is in a pinch, every vote for either of the 2 main parties matters. Throwing your vote away to a 3rd party is not going to get them noticed in these situations in any other way than badly.

If the vote was 85% 1 candidate, 15% another. Then maybe trying to get 10-15% on a 3rd party would make a major impact in the way people think about a 2 party system. But when it's near 50/50, a 3rd party has no chance and just screws things up.

very 1st political post on this forum...cleared!

 

[Crazymoogle]

This thread is really funny from a Canadian point of view.

 

[Hsieh]

Pro-choice

Whoops, how'd did I miss that? I need to proof read better.

 

[Triumph]

I can't ally myself with the Democratic Party. They steadfastly refuse to address the issues that matter in their quest to appeal to Middle America(read: the idiots).

Like I said before, if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. Kerry is Bush Lite.

 

[ballhog]

Well would you rather have Bush than Bush-lite? I wouldn't.

 

[Triumph]

I would rather people unplug thier fucking matrix plugs and realize that the two aren't that different. And having either in the White House doesn't serve the best interests of the people.

Fuck, it's like if we had an election and someone told you that you could ONLY vote for Republican nominee Satan or Democratic nominee Hitler. I'm obviously embellishing here, but NEITHER is good for America. And I bet you would ask then, "Well why can't I vote for Ralph Nader? Why can't I vote for David Cobb? Why can't I vote for the Libertarian candidate?" And the answer, of course, would be that you would be throwing your vote away. Either Satan or Hitler will win, so don't bother, you silly 3rd party supporting rascal you!

 

[ballhog]

If my options were Bush, Satan, or Nader. I vote Satan, at least he isn't stupid, If it was Bush, Hitler, of Nader, I guess I might go for Nader, but I wouldn't kid myself about wasting my time.

 

[Hitokage]

As long as people continue to think like that, they will be shackled by the two major parties to the corporate teat.

MEANWHILE, our saviors of democracy continue to beg for scraps of legitimacy on the sidewalks of Presidential Election lane.

 

[fart]

hito's point is valid. why not campaign for local reform while recognizing the limitations of the national system?

 

[Hitokage]

I mean, you constantly whine and complain that neither of the two parties are different(I disagree, but not the point here), yet then you turn around and expect me to support a party who can do nothing but throw out bold claims and unworkable plans.

Call me up when you third party types find a leader with a brain. Oh wait, you already did, and they're currently running the Republican party.


BTW, I find it amusing how the Democratic ticket is bashed for both sucking on the coporate teat and having a trial lawyer who sued corporations "frivolously"... at the same time. Seems like two conflicting views there.

 

[Wolfy]

I am a disenfranchised republican voting Libertarian - Badnarik - in November.

 

[Gruco]

realize that the two aren't that different

That line somehow worked on Gore (although the number of issues you had to be wearing blinders to was already absurd), but I don't see how anyone can think a Kerry administration wouldn't be "that different" after 4 years of Bush....

And pragmatism matters. Even accepting that the two party system is terrible and that Dems aren't worth voting for, I can't see how anyone would conclude that battling the system head on with an obvious lack of material support is the best course of action. The risk to your desired goals is too great, and there are other ways around the problem.

 

[Triumph]

I mean, you constantly whine and complain that neither of the two parties are different(I disagree, but not the point here), yet then you turn around and expect me to support a party who can do nothing but throw out bold claims and unworkable plans.

Whoa. How exactly are Nader's/the Green Party's plans unworkable? No one knows because there haven't been any attempts to implement them seriously. I would prefer to find out, and not say, "this is the system and what it will accept, now get in line and don't question how it works and why it can't be changed."

Call me up when you third party types find a leader with a brain. Oh wait, you already did, and they're currently running the Republican party.

Are you trying to imply that because Ralph Nader is an idealist that he's stupid? I'd rather have principles than die the slow death every time I capitulate on my principles to satiate the system.

BTW, I find it amusing how the Democratic ticket is bashed for both sucking on the coporate teat and having a trial lawyer who sued corporations "frivolously"... at the same time. Seems like two conflicting views there.

I've never bashed Edwards for being a trial lawyer... I posted a link and a quote from an editorial rant piece that did, but personally I believe that if a corporation has done something that can be proven in court, no matter how "frivolous", they should be tried and pay for it. They get away with far too much that they DON'T pay for.

Honestly, I do believe that the Democratic Ticket is sucking from the teat of corporate America. They get to play both sides of the coin, though. They can have contributions from all the PACs and companies, and still command the support of the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, and various environmental groups. And still not only deny the interests of the progressive groups that support them, but actively work against them. All because they "aren't the Republicans". Wow, isn't the two party system GREAT? Don't you feel that it looks out for the best interests of all Americans?

As far as my "whining but not doing anything about it" goes, I'd just like to put out the fact that you don't know me in my personal life. I am involved in several local activist and non-profit groups, including the Atlanta Food Bank and Habitat for Humanity. I don't like to toot my own civic horn, but I feel that because I AM actively trying to make the world a better place that I am entitled to bitch about how shitty things are and how the majority of the people WON'T work to make the world a better place. Sorry if any of this pisses you off.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I would like to see three parties as much as you, but this isn't the time.

This is something I hear quite often. When IS the time, though? We can't wait infinitely. And if we wait until a "safe" time... then it won't have any effect

hito's point is valid. why not campaign for local reform while recognizing the limitations of the national system?

It's not like they're mutually exclusive efforts..