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.
He/She took offense to me reporting my experience with liberal posters instead of making it a generic thread that includes ALL posters.
Had my experience be with, say, libertarians, I would have used that label in the title.
Unfortunately, my experiences were with my own cohort: Liberals.
Btw, please don't consider me, as a liberal, to be your "cohort."
I took offense to your inflammatory, generalized insult to ALL INDIVIDUAL LIBERALS with your thread title: "Despicable Liberals." In what way could that title NOT be an insult?
Ah, I see. Our "Despicable Liberals" thread starter got a break by having his offensive "title" merged with a thread entitle "Liberals are very intolerant people".... Wow! What a stroke of good fortune for him/her.
Interesting that personal attacks are now in this thread considered just being intolerant and not "despicable"?
The OP is using classic double speak--when you disguise or distort the meanings of words.
The definition of tolerance is: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
When you are opposed to people who DO NOT have a fair, objective or permissive attitude toward the beliefs, etc. of others, you are NOT intolerant. You are righteous.
The definition of righteous is: acting in an upright, moral way.
For the record, conservatism is at its heart, letting people make their own choices unless those choices hurt others. It's about personal responsibility for yourself and to the world around you, plus a big dose of minding your own business. When REPUBLICANS (who these days are often not conservatives) go off on a band wagon about controlling people's personal health decisions, marriage decisions, etc.--things that impact absolutely no one except for the person involved--they are completely intolerant.
Lots of real conservatives won't put up with the intolerant garbage coming out of the teavangelicals in the Republican party right now, so the "liberals are intolerant" crap is getting old fast. It's ridiculous.
I'm new to this thread's party, so I apologize if someone said this already. The OP started a thread with an assertion. Is that assertion true? If so, what is the evidence? Give examples, discuss.
In addition, intolerant is not the opposite of progressive. The opposite of progressive is regressive, or going back to an earlier time.
Personally, I think that liberals are indeed progressive -- wanting to move forward, such as with human rights renewable energy and climate change. The conservatives are regressive, wanting to think that the world will go back to the time when women were not in the workforce; gays were in the closet, etc. and focus on drill-drill-drill as the energy solution.
The OP is also implying hypocrisy {"Liberals are only progressive when it suits their needs"}. I don't see this hypocrisy. While conservatives say they are for states rights, we see examples, like the Terry Schiavo case, where they were all to eager to use federal muscle to deny state jurisdiction in a ruling they didn't like. Conservatives say they are for fiscal responsibility but increase deficits when in power; When Bush was in power, conservatives argues the merits of torture -- something 1950s conservatives said only the communists did.
I see no similar hypocrisy on the liberal side.
You've been exceptionally sadly misled.
But do continue to think what you think. Here...maybe this will help:
Liberals want everything done for them. That is not progressive. Conservatives accept personal responsibility and think people are perfectly capable to achieving their own goals in their own way in their own time. That is progressive. There is nothing more regressive than a liberal who thinks he is progressive.
But do continue to think what you think. Here...maybe this will help:
Liberals want everything done for them. That is not progressive. Conservatives accept personal responsibility and think people are perfectly capable to achieving their own goals in their own way in their own time. That is progressive. There is nothing more regressive than a liberal who thinks he is progressive.
Who said anything about wanting "everything done for them". Please identify the poster with a quote.
But do continue to think what you think. Here...maybe this will help:
Liberals want everything done for them. That is not progressive. Conservatives accept personal responsibility and think people are perfectly capable to achieving their own goals in their own way in their own time. That is progressive. There is nothing more regressive than a liberal who thinks he is progressive.
And it seems that right wingers do NOT believe they have any social responsibility to others nor their community. It is NOT progressive to let your neighbors and community members starve and be homeless. Seems to me that there is nothing more regressive than a far right winger who thinks he/she is progressive.
And it seems that right wingers do NOT believe they have any social responsibility to others nor their community. It is NOT progressive to let your neighbors and community members starve and be homeless. Seems to me that there is nothing more regressive than a far right winger who thinks he/she is progressive.
FancyFeast, so you call it social responsibility to take from people who earned to give to people who won't earn it? Give it up already. The more you push taking more from people who are responsible the less people are going to sympathize.
Greed is taking and expecting something when you give nothing in return for. The poor are taken care of and if they want better then they will have to do something about it. You can not continue to go after the same people over and over and over again.
And I do NOT want to hear any more whining. It is old and non-productive already.
FancyFeast, so you call it social responsibility to take from people who earned to give to people who won't earn it? Give it up already. The more you push taking more from people who are responsible the less people are going to sympathize.
Greed is taking and expecting something when you give nothing in return for. The poor are taken care of and if they want better then they will have to do something about it. You can not continue to go after the same people over and over and over again.
Exhibit A.
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.
. Wow! What a stroke of good fortune for him/her. 
