Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why is there so much liberal hate?

Page 17 of 49 [ 776 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 ... 49  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Lord_Gareth
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 440

05 Jul 2012, 10:19 pm

bizboy1 wrote:
LKL wrote:
bizboy1 wrote:
Lord_Gareth wrote:
Joker wrote:
Liberals tend to pass really stupid laws and. They want the governemant to take care of them. Instead of being self-relaint and take care of themnselfs.


Hey, moron - liberal here. I work two jobs. My wife is also employed. We still don't make a living wage - we can't afford even cheap rent and utilities on top of groceries, maintenence, and Just Plain Living Life. Programs like food stamps and cash assistance help ensure that we don't have to choose between homelessness and starvation, which would be our choices if we were forced to be "self-reliant".

Why don't you do your research on what liberals actually want before you run off at the mouth like an idiot?


If you're working two jobs and your wife works and you can't afford rent and food you're doing it wrong.
Look at some of the numbers before you make statements like that. They're freely available; how about you mitigate your ignorance before jumping in again, eh?


Try to write something useful next time. Say he and his wife make $8.00 an hour. Then if they are working full-time, for simplicity we can say there is 16 hours a day worth of labor. That is $128 dollars a day. So take $128x 5 days a week = $640 a week. $640 times 4 weeks = $2560. Assuming $1000.00 rent, that's $1560 left over for food, clothing, entertainment, etc. $8.00 an hour is really low and you're not going to have a fun life living on it. Usually people who make minimum wage are low-skilled or young adults preparing to enter the work force. I think it's a fair assumption to assume full employment. If full employment is not the case, then there really isn't an argument here. You could leave your current job and work at a fast-food joint and be largely better off. See the things liberals tend to fail at is compromise. You're going to live frugally with this type of wage. You won't be able to eat out every day, shop at Urban Outfitters, drive a prius, etc. The goal would be to work hard and get a better job. Getting government benefits will make your standard of living even higher but as a result you'll likely be unmotivated to step up the ladder.


All three jobs are minimum wage. Full-time employment is not available at our qualification level. We drive a P.O.S. we bought for $200 off the side of the road four years ago. We've tried getting into factories, but they're firing their full-time workers and contracting them as temps. We've tried BEING temps - but the former full-time workers in every field that's doing the same thing get the job first.

I don't begrudge those people their living. Life is hard and it happens to everyone. Maybe you should try a dose of the real world before you accuse those that live in it.


_________________
Et in Arcadia ego. - "Even in Arcadia, there am I."


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,555
Location: the island of defective toy santas

06 Jul 2012, 12:39 am

in america, the upper and lower socioeconomic classes remind me of what rudyard kipling said about how "east is east, west is west, and never the twain shall meet." neither side "gets" the other.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

06 Jul 2012, 12:44 am

bizboy1 wrote:
Lord_Gareth wrote:
noname_ever wrote:
Lord_Gareth wrote:
Joker wrote:
marshall wrote:
Joker wrote:
Liberals tend to pass really stupid laws and. They want the governemant to take care of them. Instead of being self-relaint and take care of themnselfs.


Economic depressions are times when people are fearful. In times like this, preaching the "every man for himself" philosophy is like pouring salt on an open wound. It's like taking a knife to the very fabric of society. There is no such thing as being self-reliant unless you choose to go live in the wilderness and grow your own food. It's a myth.


Not so I am a very self-reliant independent person I take care of myself. It's called working having a job doing what it takes to provide for your family. With out having unlce sams help.


Hi again. Three job household. Without government assistance my wife and child would be dead in the streets, as would I.

Does it hurt, being so stupid all the time?


It was you and your wife's decision to have a child. Before calling someone stupid, look in the mirror.


A few points:

1. My son was conceived during a much better time in our life, financially.

2. He still defeated three forms of birth control to enter the world.

3. Even if we didn't have our son, our current options would still be homelessness or starvation.


You have given me the impression that you bear no responsibility for your actions. Having sex, protected or unprotected, carries the risk of getting the female partner pregnant. Maybe instead of having sex you could have done something more productive. You talk like you have no option: either homelessness or starvation. Yet, if you took responsibility, you would be able to function without living off the government.


I love how liberals are called arrogant for having contempt for clueless conservatives who's only talent is kicking people when they're down. It seems conservatives are blind to the fact that their ideology makes them conduct themselves like utter douchebags and then get indignant when people with actual human empathy swing back.



DC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,477

06 Jul 2012, 1:40 am

Joker wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
HisDivineMajesty wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
You do know the what the definition of "sympathy" is, right? Do you sympathize with Breivik, or not?


Not deeply, but I understand why he decided to believe what he did. Just like I understand why the French were angry at their king, or the Americans were angry at the British government.


That is disgusting, truly revolting. Breivik and his actions are not comparable to American and French revolutionaries. He is in the same camp as Muslim terrorists as well as homegrown US terrorists like Ted Kaczynski and Timothy McVeigh.


QFT.


And yet you idolize the IRA, what a hypocrite. :lol:



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

06 Jul 2012, 1:59 am

ruveyn wrote:
Hey! You guys sound like a bunch of NTs having a pi**ing contest.

ruveyn
QFT



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

06 Jul 2012, 2:07 am

bizboy1 wrote:
LKL wrote:
bizboy1 wrote:
Lord_Gareth wrote:
Joker wrote:
Liberals tend to pass really stupid laws and. They want the governemant to take care of them. Instead of being self-relaint and take care of themnselfs.


Hey, moron - liberal here. I work two jobs. My wife is also employed. We still don't make a living wage - we can't afford even cheap rent and utilities on top of groceries, maintenence, and Just Plain Living Life. Programs like food stamps and cash assistance help ensure that we don't have to choose between homelessness and starvation, which would be our choices if we were forced to be "self-reliant".

Why don't you do your research on what liberals actually want before you run off at the mouth like an idiot?


If you're working two jobs and your wife works and you can't afford rent and food you're doing it wrong.
Look at some of the numbers before you make statements like that. They're freely available; how about you mitigate your ignorance before jumping in again, eh?


Try to write something useful next time. Say he and his wife make $8.00 an hour. Then if they are working full-time, for simplicity we can say there is 16 hours a day worth of labor. That is $128 dollars a day. So take $128x 5 days a week = $640 a week. $640 times 4 weeks = $2560. Assuming $1000.00 rent, that's $1560 left over for food, clothing, entertainment, etc. $8.00 an hour is really low and you're not going to have a fun life living on it. Usually people who make minimum wage are low-skilled or young adults preparing to enter the work force. I think it's a fair assumption to assume full employment. If full employment is not the case, then there really isn't an argument here. You could leave your current job and work at a fast-food joint and be largely better off. See the things liberals tend to fail at is compromise. You're going to live frugally with this type of wage. You won't be able to eat out every day, shop at Urban Outfitters, drive a prius, etc. The goal would be to work hard and get a better job. Getting government benefits will make your standard of living even higher but as a result you'll likely be unmotivated to step up the ladder.
Dude, you're making yourself look more and more naive - not to mention single, childless, and living in your parent's basement. Seriously, do some research int where people's money goes. Start with taxes, since they're taken out before one ever sees a cent, and work on childcare, auto repairs, payments on student loans, utilities, medical expenses, hygeine, food, etc. from there. None of those things is a lavish expenditure, but it will eat thorough that money in no time at all.

Edit: well, I called that one. Bizboy, you really are in for a rude awakening when stop chiseling from your parents. I hope you have the sense then to realize what an arrogant ass you were, instead of being one of the multitude of conservatives who hypocritically think that their problems are so much worse than everyone else's and their worth so much higher.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,426
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Jul 2012, 2:39 am

marshall wrote:
bizboy1 wrote:
Lord_Gareth wrote:
noname_ever wrote:
Lord_Gareth wrote:
Joker wrote:
marshall wrote:
Joker wrote:
Liberals tend to pass really stupid laws and. They want the governemant to take care of them. Instead of being self-relaint and take care of themnselfs.


Economic depressions are times when people are fearful. In times like this, preaching the "every man for himself" philosophy is like pouring salt on an open wound. It's like taking a knife to the very fabric of society. There is no such thing as being self-reliant unless you choose to go live in the wilderness and grow your own food. It's a myth.


Not so I am a very self-reliant independent person I take care of myself. It's called working having a job doing what it takes to provide for your family. With out having unlce sams help.


Hi again. Three job household. Without government assistance my wife and child would be dead in the streets, as would I.

Does it hurt, being so stupid all the time?


It was you and your wife's decision to have a child. Before calling someone stupid, look in the mirror.


A few points:

1. My son was conceived during a much better time in our life, financially.

2. He still defeated three forms of birth control to enter the world.

3. Even if we didn't have our son, our current options would still be homelessness or starvation.


You have given me the impression that you bear no responsibility for your actions. Having sex, protected or unprotected, carries the risk of getting the female partner pregnant. Maybe instead of having sex you could have done something more productive. You talk like you have no option: either homelessness or starvation. Yet, if you took responsibility, you would be able to function without living off the government.


I love how liberals are called arrogant for having contempt for clueless conservatives who's only talent is kicking people when they're down. It seems conservatives are blind to the fact that their ideology makes them conduct themselves like utter douchebags and then get indignant when people with actual human empathy swing back.


Very, very well said.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

06 Jul 2012, 4:52 am

Vigilans wrote:
You see no difference between a political body declaring itself independent, or supplanting an uninterested and tyrannical government, and a psychopathic mass murderer? Who made a point to cause emergency services to be distracted so he could maximize how many unarmed young people he could kill?


In terms of morality, perhaps. Otherwise, he was convinced that he was doing the right thing, making a political statement that would cause popular resistance, and that Norway would thank him eventually. Don't forget, the American War of Independence wasn't too popular either.

Vigilans wrote:
Military slavery is a fact of life even in the 21st century. It is called a draft. The revolution the French started had good goals to begin with (get rid of the Bourbons) but it was quickly taken over by radicals who were more interested in removing opposition to their own tyranny


The crucial difference between modern drafts and the French one is that the French one had the express purpose of gathering men who could be killed in wars. They had several wars against European monarchies, and very few soldiers, so they had to invent the levée en masse to force men to get themselves killed for their benefit. Ah, and as for the revolution itself - they also swept through the countryside and murdered entire families for being noblemen or supporting noblemen. Children weren't exempt from that, and I've read about some being hanged from castle gates for their father's political opinions. This was before the king had even been arrested.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 Jul 2012, 6:32 am

Vigilans wrote:

Military slavery is a fact of life even in the 21st century. It is called a draft. The revolution the French started had good goals to begin with (get rid of the Bourbons) but it was quickly taken over by radicals who were more interested in removing opposition to their own tyranny


The Reductii ad absurdum of the French Revolution were

1. Maximillian Robespierre
2. Napoleon Bonaparte.

ruveyn



Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,015
Location: Houston, Texas

06 Jul 2012, 10:07 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
marshall wrote:
noname_ever wrote:
To be truly hateful, violence should be required. Otherwise you risk "selective hate" using the same mechanic as selective outrage. Compare what spews from WBC, KKK offshoots, and from Al Sharpton's mouth. Why aren't all of them considered hate groups?

Call it hypocrisy or whatever, but most "liberal hate" is more retaliatory in nature. Most "conservative hate" is purely unprovoked effort to attack and make life difficult for already marginalized groups. Comparing questionable things coming from the likes of Rev. Wright to that coming from someone like Fred Phelps is poor equivocation.

Upon witnessing a fight between a pit bull and a chihuahua conservatives would be more likely to make a fuss about the chihuahua fighting dirty. That pretty much sums up my impression of conservative morality.


And as Michael Moore had pointed out concerning Rev. Wright: he can't really know what a black person like Wright has gone through in a lifetime, and so can't judge.
Wright's inflammatory statements had arisen from a lifetime of living as a second class citizen, while those WBC idiots are driven from blind, unprovoked hate and prejudice.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


And the sad thing is that the WBC people were programmed by Freddy Boy to think that way.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

06 Jul 2012, 10:08 am

It depends on which kind of liberal we're talking about. I quite like the social and financial liberals, who adopt the view "I don't really care what you do so long as it doesn't have a negative consequence for me". I don't like the kind of liberal who is really a socialist or social democrat, because that kind of liberal tends to smell of old bong water and invasion of privacy. I've lived most of my life under a socialist/social democratic government, and so far I've seen over-taxation, de-incentivizing work, constant fingering in my private life, a total nanny state that adopts conformity as its primary goal and shames non-conformists into silence.



Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Age: 182
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,415
Location: My own version of reality

06 Jul 2012, 10:11 am

TM wrote:
It depends on which kind of liberal we're talking about. I quite like the social and financial liberals, who adopt the view "I don't really care what you do so long as it doesn't have a negative consequence for me". I don't like the kind of liberal who is really a socialist or social democrat, because that kind of liberal tends to smell of old bong water and invasion of privacy. I've lived most of my life under a socialist/social democratic government, and so far I've seen over-taxation, de-incentivizing work, constant fingering in my private life, a total nanny state that adopts conformity as its primary goal and shames non-conformists into silence.
Only thing I thought of was the patriot act.


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


SpiritBlooms
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Nov 2009
Age: 68
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,024

06 Jul 2012, 10:18 am

...



Last edited by SpiritBlooms on 09 Jul 2012, 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

06 Jul 2012, 10:27 am

SpiritBlooms wrote:
TM wrote:
It depends on which kind of liberal we're talking about. I quite like the social and financial liberals, who adopt the view "I don't really care what you do so long as it doesn't have a negative consequence for me". I don't like the kind of liberal who is really a socialist or social democrat, because that kind of liberal tends to smell of old bong water and invasion of privacy. I've lived most of my life under a socialist/social democratic government, and so far I've seen over-taxation, de-incentivizing work, constant fingering in my private life, a total nanny state that adopts conformity as its primary goal and shames non-conformists into silence.
Well those are all just labels, some of us label ourselves social democrat and mean one thing, others label themselves social democrat and mean another. You really can't judge accurately by labels, you know. I want nothing to do with bongs, and privacy is sacrosanct as far as I'm concerned. The Patriot Act and TSA are the worst invasions of privacy I've seen in a long time, and I think most social democrats are against them.

So, so much for labels.


@both of you. There is a strong difference between "American" liberal and "European" liberal, most American liberals would be moderate right wingers here.



Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Age: 182
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,415
Location: My own version of reality

06 Jul 2012, 10:32 am

TM wrote:
SpiritBlooms wrote:
TM wrote:
It depends on which kind of liberal we're talking about. I quite like the social and financial liberals, who adopt the view "I don't really care what you do so long as it doesn't have a negative consequence for me". I don't like the kind of liberal who is really a socialist or social democrat, because that kind of liberal tends to smell of old bong water and invasion of privacy. I've lived most of my life under a socialist/social democratic government, and so far I've seen over-taxation, de-incentivizing work, constant fingering in my private life, a total nanny state that adopts conformity as its primary goal and shames non-conformists into silence.
Well those are all just labels, some of us label ourselves social democrat and mean one thing, others label themselves social democrat and mean another. You really can't judge accurately by labels, you know. I want nothing to do with bongs, and privacy is sacrosanct as far as I'm concerned. The Patriot Act and TSA are the worst invasions of privacy I've seen in a long time, and I think most social democrats are against them.

So, so much for labels.


@both of you. There is a strong difference between "American" liberal and "European" liberal, most American liberals would be moderate right wingers here.
I thought about asking if you were american...


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

06 Jul 2012, 10:45 am

Delphiki wrote:
TM wrote:
SpiritBlooms wrote:
TM wrote:
It depends on which kind of liberal we're talking about. I quite like the social and financial liberals, who adopt the view "I don't really care what you do so long as it doesn't have a negative consequence for me". I don't like the kind of liberal who is really a socialist or social democrat, because that kind of liberal tends to smell of old bong water and invasion of privacy. I've lived most of my life under a socialist/social democratic government, and so far I've seen over-taxation, de-incentivizing work, constant fingering in my private life, a total nanny state that adopts conformity as its primary goal and shames non-conformists into silence.
Well those are all just labels, some of us label ourselves social democrat and mean one thing, others label themselves social democrat and mean another. You really can't judge accurately by labels, you know. I want nothing to do with bongs, and privacy is sacrosanct as far as I'm concerned. The Patriot Act and TSA are the worst invasions of privacy I've seen in a long time, and I think most social democrats are against them.

So, so much for labels.


@both of you. There is a strong difference between "American" liberal and "European" liberal, most American liberals would be moderate right wingers here.
I thought about asking if you were american...


Obama in European eyes, would be to the right of the Tories in England and most other European conservative parties. It's quite frankly insane how far right American politics are.