Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Liberals open minded...thats the biggest joke I have ever heard...They are as closed minded as they can be. If you watch Fox News they have their opinion ready to say how stupid you are....but they never ask first if you ONLY watch Fox news, like they usually never watch it but know what it is on there the entire day.
They always know that others have to share but hardly ever share themself!
So what? Most conservatives strongly oppose legalizing marijuana, including even medical marijuana.
Most conservatives on Fox News on Saturday mornings get so highly emotional in their rantings, I just dismiss them as entertainment with little if anything of practical value learned.
You're not talking about liberals. You're talking about radicals.
Unfortunately the democrat party is being controlled by the liberal radicals. They are making the rules now. I would love to have the conservative democrats take back their party.
Unfortunately the democrat party is being controlled by the liberal radicals. They are making the rules now. I would love to have the conservative democrats take back their party.
Umm. Perhaps you missed the word paraphrased ? And no I am not now, and was never a liberal. I like to think that I am smarter than that. The quote was attributed to Churchill and being a liberal you refuse to believe it because it does not suit you. Can you prove he never said it?? I doubt it.
I tried pretty hard to find an equally amusing image for "Burden of Proof." I couldn't. This will have to suffice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl
No, I didn't miss it, but Churchill never said anything like that at all. Period.
I don't know why you're upset with me for your error. Churchill never said anything at all like that at all. You need to look up the definition of paraphrase.
With your definition I could paraphrase Washington's Gettysburg Address.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heritage Member
Really? I hear this a lot from liberals, but what is the reality?
You hear that liberals are more open minded? Let's go over your list.
Quote:
Are liberals open to:
allowing full gun rights
giving more protection to the unborn
lowering the tax burden on business overall
securing our borders
enforcing immigration laws
allowing a company (Boeing) to create more jobs in right to work states
allowing people to not be forced to buy a product for simply being alive (HI)
allowing states to run their own educational system without mandates and interference from the federal government
allowing minorities and Caucasians to have the same exact rights, without special rights for any one group
allowing workers to vote in a secure and private environment either for or against unionizing, just like when voting for politicians
allowing thousands of jobs to be created by allowing states to decide where and when our own natural energy sources can be harvested
allowing people to succeed or fail on their own
With the exception of a few items, those are all conservative ideology. Why would someone who is politically opposite be open to conservative ideology? It's logically incoherent.
Instead, your list should be a list of problems, with a second list of conservative responses and liberal responses to those problems. Measuring who has the most open platform in their response would determine who is more open minded in that regards. Generally new and novel ideas win in such cases. Let us revise your list to reflect the this measurement. I'll create the list of problems. You post your list of conservative responses.
Gun violence in the United States.
Abortion Laws and Regulations.
Taxes on Small Business
National Borders
Immigration Laws.
Unions and Corporate Personhood
Health Care Reform
Education Reform
allowing minorities and Caucasians to have the same exact rights, without special rights for any one group <--- You'll have to explain this one. Are you referring to the fourteenth amendment?
Unions
Energy Future, Natural Resources
Allowing people to succeed or fail on their own
Quote:
No matter how many times liberals "claim" to be open minded, they prove themselves not to be. For the most part, liberals are only open to things which "they" want.
You're aware that this isn't an argument. Replace "Liberal" with "Conservative."
Quote:
If they were truly open minded, they would be embracing conversation and ideas from their conservative counterparts. But just by the short list I provided you can see liberals are far from open minded and in fact, they want to "push" their ideology down our throats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heritage Member
Eliminating 100% of the deductions/loopholes and GREATLY reducing the rate. A simple system. Pay a small percentage of taxes on ALL of the income. The numbers would have to be run, but I am thinking 10% or less.
Think of the money that could be saved by many companies currently hiring tax lawyers to get them out of paying taxes. Instead, a simple one page tax return for business and individuals:
Earned $100 and paid $10 in taxes
Earned $100,000 and paid $10,000 in taxes
Earned $1,000,000 and paid $100,000 in taxes
Again, the exact % for businesses and individuals would have to be properly calculated out.
Flat taxes do not work. The guy making 20,000 who loses 2,000 loses more than the guy making 2,000,000 and loses 200,000 to taxes. The value of the dollar is more important to low-income groups. Taking their money is financially harder than those in the high-income brackets. I.E., high-earners can afford high-tax rates. Bread costs $4 for everyone.
Not to mention, without tax incentives for reinvesting in your company, there would be zero purpose to do so. High taxes now force companies to reinvest, or they risk losing that money to federal taxes. When you cut those taxes as we have done, they don't invest more money, they keep it. Why wouldn't they, they don't have to run the risk of giving it to the government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamBarrow
Another thing liberals do. They justify everything and everything by saying "it's progress." As if new necessarily equals better.
By definition, doing something other than what you are doing now is progressive. You move in a direction other than "here." Which, brings me to the point that if what you are doing now isn't working, doing something new can only help.
By definition, doing something other than what you are doing now is progressive. You move in a direction other than "here." Which, brings me to the point that if what you are doing now isn't working, doing something new can only help.
And conservatives don't want to change anything??? The progress argument is stupid, because any change is progress. That's my point.
I tried pretty hard to find an equally amusing image for "Burden of Proof." I couldn't. This will have to suffice.
You hear that liberals are more open minded? Let's go over your list.
With the exception of a few items, those are all conservative ideology. Why would someone who is politically opposite be open to conservative ideology? It's logically incoherent.
Instead, your list should be a list of problems, with a second list of conservative responses and liberal responses to those problems. Measuring who has the most open platform in their response would determine who is more open minded in that regards. Generally new and novel ideas win in such cases. Let us revise your list to reflect the this measurement. I'll create the list of problems. You post your list of conservative responses.
Gun violence in the United States.
Abortion Laws and Regulations.
Taxes on Small Business
National Borders
Immigration Laws.
Unions and Corporate Personhood
Health Care Reform
Education Reform
allowing minorities and Caucasians to have the same exact rights, without special rights for any one group <--- You'll have to explain this one. Are you referring to the fourteenth amendment?
Unions
Energy Future, Natural Resources
Allowing people to succeed or fail on their own
You're aware that this isn't an argument. Replace "Liberal" with "Conservative."
Flat taxes do not work. The guy making 20,000 who loses 2,000 loses more than the guy making 2,000,000 and loses 200,000 to taxes. The value of the dollar is more important to low-income groups. Taking their money is financially harder than those in the high-income brackets. I.E., high-earners can afford high-tax rates. Bread costs $4 for everyone.
Not to mention, without tax incentives for reinvesting in your company, there would be zero purpose to do so. High taxes now force companies to reinvest, or they risk losing that money to federal taxes. When you cut those taxes as we have done, they don't invest more money, they keep it. Why wouldn't they, they don't have to run the risk of giving it to the government.
By definition, doing something other than what you are doing now is progressive. You move in a direction other than "here." Which, brings me to the point that if what you are doing now isn't working, doing something new can only help.
You have just proved the opposite point. You DO OPPOSE the personal freedoms listed, but simply try to argue WHY YOU ARE OPPOSED to those personal freedoms. You don't debate that you want to restrict other people's rights and activities- it is just why and how!
Why do so many young people consider themselves liberals, to only then become more and more conservative as they get older?
People who make more and more money as they get older may eventually become republicans because they don't want to get taxed as much, perhaps. I still lean to the left, but as I grow older I realize that some liberal causes are "pie in the sky" pipe dreams that don't take into account practical realities. For example, liberal me would say that labor unions are necessary to protect the rights of the working class. Many years and an economics degree later, and after seeing my father go on strike, get laid off, and eventually join a class-action suit against his old labor union, conservative me would say that unions have abused thier power, do not serve the working class as they claim to do, and are a disruptive force to businesses and to productivity. They shouldn't be abolished entirely, but they need to be kept in check - call me J.D. Rockefeller if you like.
I'm really not trying to start a debate about unions here and I won't reply to any arguments for or against them in this thread. My point is that youthful ideology gets washed away by harsh reality over time, as cynical as that sounds.
People who make more and more money as they get older may eventually become republicans because they don't want to get taxed as much, perhaps. I still lean to the left, but as I grow older I realize that some liberal causes are "pie in the sky" pipe dreams that don't take into account practical realities. For example, liberal me would say that labor unions are necessary to protect the rights of the working class. Many years and an economics degree later, and after seeing my father go on strike, get laid off, and eventually join a class-action suit against his old labor union, conservative me would say that unions have abused thier power, do not serve the working class as they claim to do, and are a disruptive force to businesses and to productivity. They shouldn't be abolished entirely, but they need to be kept in check - call me J.D. Rockefeller if you like.
I'm really not trying to start a debate about unions here and I won't reply to any arguments for or against them in this thread. My point is that youthful ideology gets washed away by harsh reality over time, as cynical as that sounds.
I understand your point about as people grow older they may grow richer so change to Republican....that's probably quite true because The Wealthy are a worshipped and protected class in the US.....they see that as they gain more and more money they pay less and less of their fair share which Republicans are happy about.
but as I grow older I realize that some Repug/Conservative causes are "pie in the sky" pipe dreams that don't take into account practical realities.....like abortion.
I don't want to turn this into yet another boring abortion thread but Repugs think that if you say "if" humans don't have sex, women "should" keep their legs closed, ..say that enough times times human nature will change. It won't, it will never be a perfect world as they "wish" it "should" be.
They do NOT take into account the practical realities that abortion has been around, legal and illegal, and will always be around.....liberals are smart/kind/practical enough to want to make them rare and safe.....Repugs want to punish these women....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
