How To Spot A Liberal....

CrackerJax

New Member
:lol: okay, okay.......tranquilo (spanish for calm down)...:lol:


I'm going to give you some sage (very good) advice here....for free. You are 21. You have your entire life ahead of you. Do yourself a TREMENDOUS favor and hire a part time private tutor. Perhaps a hot babe from a nearby College :lol:. The greatest power for you to improve yourself is from within, not the govt. or anyone else.... you.
If you cannot present yourself well to others, your rate of success will be diminished. Are there exceptions? Sure, like with all things. That's all they are though, exceptions, not the rule.
Now things like the Theory of Relativity HARDLY ever comes up in everyday conversation, but spelling and speech patterns identify you every time you write or speak...about anything.

Hire a tutor, or go to the library. There is absolutely no shame in improving your communication skills. For a small investment of your time, you can catch up. Do it.... you will be glad you did. So will everyone else.

PS... you needn't leave. I run loose threads......I'm knitting a sweater.
 

snail240

Well-Known Member
:lol: okay, okay.......tranquilo (spanish for calm down)...:lol:


I'm going to give you some sage (very good) advice here....for free. You are 21. You have your entire life ahead of you. Do yourself a TREMENDOUS favor and hire a part time private tutor. Perhaps a hot babe from a nearby College :lol:. The greatest power for you to improve yourself is from within, not the govt. or anyone else.... you.
If you cannot present yourself well to others, your rate of success will be diminished. Are there exceptions? Sure, like with all things. That's all they are though, exceptions, not the rule.
Now things like the Theory of Relativity HARDLY ever comes up in everyday conversation, but spelling and speech patterns identify you every time you write or speak...about anything.

Hire a tutor, or go to the library. There is absolutely no shame in improving your communication skills. For a small investment of your time, you can catch up. Do it.... you will be glad you did. So will everyone else.

PS... you needn't leave. I run loose threads......I'm knitting a sweater.
Go to my thread you old fart and stop jacking your own thread!
 

snail240

Well-Known Member
Ahhhh, I was hoping for something better......:sad:

Carry on!
I tried to get angry but I just couldnt. Maybe im just to nice I need to get mean and educated shove it down peoples throats.

Or ill just smoke some weed and be different maybe buy a dictionairy or some shit.
 

CrackerJax

New Member
I think most of your anger comes from not being able to comprehend the issues beyond the headline captions. You need a foundation if you want to build yourself up. Don't do it for anyone else..... but you. You'll find out as you go through life that ppl will be more than willing to take advantage of your lack of education. The best protection can only be accomplished by YOU.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
I got tired of trying to have an intelligent debate with folks who don't even have a good grasp of what thier political party stands for.

Next thing you'll claim that the ;libs are for smaller, and less intrusive government...

Liberals interpret the constitution "liberally"; not to be confused with "liberty". Get it now?

I'm not going to speak for other "liberals", because I'm sure not all of them agree on every issue.

Am I for smaller, less intrusive government? OF COURSE I AM. Does that mean ALL other dems or liberals are? OF COURSE NOT!

See what I'm doing? I'm NOT stereotyping or trying to put ALL liberals into the same box, because they don't all fit there.

There are stupid people on either side of the issue. Only a complete idiot would want to give the government MORE power over us. Don't you agree?

And as for what liberalism actually means, YES it does have to do with liberty. INDIVIDUAL liberty. That's what we're about. If you don't agree that individual liberties are worth preserving, then maybe you'd be happier under a communist regime?
 

CrackerJax

New Member
You are not a liberal then. Sorry.... find another term for yourself, but liberal means big govt. and big govt. solutions. After all, this is a big country.
 

MexicanWarlord420

Active Member
You are not a liberal then. Sorry.... find another term for yourself, but liberal means big govt. and big govt. solutions. After all, this is a big country.
I think the majority of this country wants BETTER government. If the government has to grow or shrink to fit those needs then so be it, but honestly, I think whatever size our government is, there will always be pros and cons to it. Not everything fits the label
 

CrackerJax

New Member
Lib's fit their label though. One of the reasons why it is given.

Let's just pull it apart. If you have a small public sector, then you will also have a large private sector filling the gap. This is a Lib's nightmare.....

Conversely, if you have a large govt., you will have a much smaller private sector (think engine of your car). This is a Lib's goal...... a goal towards inefficiency..... this is why lib's are an economic farce...... truly a farce.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
You are not a liberal then. Sorry.... find another term for yourself, but liberal means big govt. and big govt. solutions. After all, this is a big country.

Again, liberalism has nothing to do with big government. Yes, we support government-run programs, etc, that help the poor. that's a far cry from wanting MORE government intervention, after all, there are already plenty of programs in place and plenty of people benefiting from them. Yes, we believe the government should regulate certain things. According to just about anyone you ask, the latest stock market crash was caused by DEREGULATION! So, we've seen what happens when the government isn't keeping close enough tabs.

Look, things are changing. You can't define liberalism based on some expired notion from half a century ago. People in general are beginning to smarten up about their government and realize they aren't always acting with our best interests in mind.

I'm just about as liberal as they come, aside from the fact that I won't blindly support a government that keeps fucking up. I realize that our government is just a bunch of people, and people aren't infallible.

Does that make me un-liberal (yeah I just made that word up)? Nah, it just means I'm realistic.

One need not subscribe to every ideal attributed to "liberals" in order to qualify as a liberal. Just as you don't have to subscribe to a pro-life stance in order to be a republican.

Do YOU get it?
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Lib's fit their label though. One of the reasons why it is given.

Let's just pull it apart. If you have a small public sector, then you will also have a large private sector filling the gap. This is a Lib's nightmare.....

Conversely, if you have a large govt., you will have a much smaller private sector (think engine of your car). This is a Lib's goal...... a goal towards inefficiency..... this is why lib's are an economic farce...... truly a farce.
Government intervention does not necessarily mean MORE government, or a LARGER government.

There you go, still trying to define liberals based on an ideal from decades ago.

YES, back in the day "liberals" wanted things like social security, medicare, etc. Naturally that meant expanding the government to create agencies to handle those programs.

We have those things now, and there's no need for more players on the team. What we need now is for those players to perfect their game, or at least improve it.

Let's say it together! Government intervention doesn't mean bigger government!

The only potentially good thing that could come out of expanded government is more jobs, and at least they'd be semi-stable and come with decent benefits.

Liberal:

–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. (often initial capital letter
) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. 3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism. 4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers. 6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies. 7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners. 8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. 9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor. 10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation. 11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule. 12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts. 13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion. 15. (often initial capital letter
) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.



Related forms:
lib⋅er⋅al⋅ly, adverb
lib⋅er⋅al⋅ness, noun

Synonyms:
1. progressive. 7.broad-minded, unprejudiced. 9. beneficent, charitable, openhanded, munificent, unstinting, lavish. See generous. 10. See ample.


Antonyms:
1. reactionary. 8. intolerant. 9, 10. niggardly.












lib·er·al (lĭb'ər-əl, lĭb'rəl)
adj.
    1. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
    2. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
    3. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
    4. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
    5. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
    6. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
    7. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
    8. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
    1. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
    2. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
    3. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
    4. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
  1. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
  2. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
    1. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
    2. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
  1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
  2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.

[Middle English, generous, from Old French, from Latin līberālis, from līber, free; see leudh- in Indo-European roots.]
lib'er·al·ly adv., lib'er·al·ness n.
Synonyms: These adjectives mean willing or marked by a willingness to give unstintingly: a liberal backer of the arts; a bounteous feast; bountiful compliments; a freehanded host; a generous donation; a handsome offer; a munificent gift; fond and openhanded grandparents. See Also Synonyms at broad-minded.Antonym: stingy
liberal

A descriptive term for persons, policies, and beliefs associated with liberalism.





liberal (adj.)
c.1375, from O.Fr. liberal "befitting free men, noble, generous," from L. liberalis "noble, generous," lit. "pertaining to a free man," from liber "free," from PIE base *leudheros (cf. Gk. eleutheros "free"), probably originally "belonging to the people" (though the precise semantic development is obscure), from *leudho- "people" (cf. O.C.S. ljudu, Lith. liaudis, O.E. leod, Ger. Leute "nation, people"). Earliest reference in Eng. is to the liberal arts (L. artes liberales; see art (n.)), the seven attainments directed to intellectual enlargement, not immediate practical purpose, and thus deemed worthy of a free man (the word in this sense was opposed to servile or mechanical). Sense of "free in bestowing" is from 1387. With a meaning "free from restraint in speech or action" (1490) liberal was used 16c.-17c. as a term of reproach. It revived in a positive sense in the Enlightenment, with a meaning "free from prejudice, tolerant," which emerged 1776-88. Purely in ref. to political opinion, "tending in favor of freedom and democracy" it dates from c.1801, from Fr. libéral, originally applied in Eng. by its opponents (often in Fr. form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness) to the party favorable to individual political freedoms. But also (especially in U.S. politics) tending to mean "favorable to government action to effect social change," which seems at times to draw more from the religious sense of "free from prejudice in favor of traditional opinions and established institutions" (and thus open to new ideas and plans of reform), which dates from 1823.
 

CrackerJax

New Member
Please, enough with the definitions already. Let's just deal with reality..... Obama is a Liberal...who would argue otherwise. Obama wants to EXPLODE the Govt. all over..... who would argue otherwise.

Stop the slippery semantics...... it won't wash. Liberal policies require govt. intervention. The more the intervention, the bigger the govt....which leads to my SIG. :wink:
 

Stoney McFried

Well-Known Member
I'm a little late but...leftie!
Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -6.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.87


 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Please, enough with the definitions already. Let's just deal with reality..... Obama is a Liberal...who would argue otherwise. Obama wants to EXPLODE the Govt. all over..... who would argue otherwise.

Stop the slippery semantics...... it won't wash. Liberal policies require govt. intervention. The more the intervention, the bigger the govt....which leads to my SIG. :wink:

Okay, let's clear something up.

OBAMA is a liar. He SAYS he's liberal, but since we all know he's a liar, why do you choose to trust him on that while disregarding every other statement he makes as untrue?

Obama is NOT a liberal. He's a puppet.

Enough with the definitions? YOU'RE the one who keeps trying to define us "liberals".. What? You can dish it out but you can't take it?

So if only "liberals" want to grow the government, then by YOUR definition George Bush is the biggest liberal of all, since under Bush we saw the largest expansion of government since FDR.
 

medicineman

New Member
The deal is, the righties have this fractured view of us libarals and think we are all alike. There are no words to lift the viel of ignorance on them about liberals. We are the enemy, no matter what we really think, and trying to converse with them is as lame as talking to the wall. Righties are so constricted in their views, it's like they look at the world through a tiny tube and everything that doesn't fit in that view is evil and stupid. I refuse to be defined by their constricted views. I am much more that a guy that wants bigger government. I'd say actually we could cut our government in half and still TCB, but then you'd have 6 million bureaucrats without a job, and the economy in even worse shape, add to that about 3 million military related jobs after shrinking that behemoth, and the job situation would blow Obamas mind. Big government, no way. Smart smaller government, way.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
The deal is, the righties have this fractured view of us libarals and think we are all alike. There are no words to lift the viel of ignorance on them about liberals. We are the enemy, no matter what we really think, and trying to converse with them is as lame as talking to the wall. Righties are so constricted in their views, it's like they look at the world through a tiny tube and everything that doesn't fit in that view is evil and stupid. I refuse to be defined by their constricted views. I am much more that a guy that wants bigger government. I'd say actually we could cut our government in half and still TCB, but then you'd have 6 million bureaucrats without a job, and the economy in even worse shape, add to that about 3 million military related jobs after shrinking that behemoth, and the job situation would blow Obamas mind. Big government, no way. Smart smaller government, way.
That explains why the antonyms for the word "liberal" are:

conservative and narrow-minded
 

medicineman

New Member
You just did everything to "righties" that you accuse them of doing to you. Are you sure you are looking at a monitor and not a mirror?
No, telling truth is not doing anything but telling truth. If you step back from your own perspective and look at this forum from a completly objective stance, I'll bet what you find is liberals trying to explain their position and righties disrespecting them, even insulting them. I am one of the few liberals on site that takes no shit from righties and it really pisses them off.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
You just did everything to "righties" that you accuse them of doing to you. Are you sure you are looking at a monitor and not a mirror?

PrincessTurdstool, you seem to have your head on squarely. I don't even care what brand of politics you subscribe to. At least you seem to understand that one does not have to support "big government" in order to be liberal in their ideals and politics.

There really is no defined "line" that a person must stand behind in order to be "conservative" or "liberal", or even republican or democrat. Maybe once upon a time that line existed, but no longer.

I don't really view any political figures as "conservative" or "liberal". They're all the same, if you ask me. I wouldn't put myself in the same category of ideals as any of them.

Powermongers, they are, the whole lot of them.
 
Top