This is why you just can't talk to liberals...

[Manedwolf]

Doublespeak, anyone? This was a reply to a reply where a dork wrote in screaming that the paper was all "pro-gun, pro-smoking and homophobic"...

He wrote back when someone asked why he was reading a CONSERVATIVE paper instead of the Boston Globe, with this:

I am not a Mass. invader. I have lived in the state my entire life, and my family has lived there for generations. Don't categorize anyone who doesn't share your narrow viewpoint as an outsider. I believe in decentralization of power, local control, and free choice, but within the context of accountability, equity, and protection of the public good. It is incredibly foolish to think that the liberals are still advocating big, centralized government and that conservatives are for keeping the government out of people's business as if it were still the 1950s. Liberals are for expanded accountability and greater spending with more, but decentralized social progams and free choice in areas that do not endanger others (public smoking, guns, etc), whereas conservatives are for social restrictions (civil liberties, marriage, family planning) and expanded military spending. Both parties spend heavily and control aspects of individual life and "freedoms", but there is a clear difference between what is being controlled, by whom, and for what purpose. It's time to turn the page in this country, and the modern liberals are the ones who can accomplish it best.

I don't even know what to say. That's just...How can you argue with someone who believes that level of Newspeak doubletalk?

Liberals offer free choice in areas that don't endanger others, like guns and smoking in public do? HUH?

[wooderson]

What doublespeak?

"Both parties spend heavily and control aspects of individual life and "freedoms", but there is a clear difference between what is being controlled, by whom, and for what purpose."

This is true. His characterization of 'liberal aims' is colored by his ideological stance, as would be your own - and everyone else's (of those with a 'dog in this fight' - libertarians and leftists standing outside the liberal/conservative spectrum may have more standing to render these assessments). But the underlying argument is surprisingly honest.

These questions of value really throw you for a loop, don't they?

And in terms of the title - you can't "talk to liberals" because they don't agree with you? Is that it?

[Thor]

To quote Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and maybe a few others, "Liberalism is a mental disorder"

[wooderson]

Hard to argue with such stunning insight.

[Archie]

Winston Churchill said, "A young man who is not a liberal, has no heart ... but an old man who is not a conservative, has no mind!"

William F. Buckley wrote a book titled, "Up From Liberalism".

Ann Coulter is more concise, "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans".

(Of course the liberal guiding lights are Michael Moore, Al Franken and that comedian who didn't get to run after all.)

Whereas not all Democrats are Moonbat Liberals (tree hugging, cradle-to-grave big-government-is-the-answer-to-all-problems), and not all Republicans are Goldwater Conservatives (strict Constitutionalist) the two parties do at least symbolize the two views of government.  Republicans see government generally as a treacherous servant while Democrats see government (when they control it) as benevolent all-father.

President Bush is not the conservative I wish he was.  He's still been a much better man - leader, decision maker and administrator - for the nation than either former Vice President Gore or Senator Kerry.  I'm working to see a more conservative - Constitutionalist - element in the White House and Congress.

The main problem right now is the prediction attributed to Alexander Tytler, "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury."

Whether Alexander Tytler said that or not, that's sure what's happening today.  That's the popular principle of the Democrat Party, 'What's in it for me?'

[Iain]

Winston Churchill said, "A young man who is not a liberal, has no heart ... but an old man who is not a conservative, has no mind!"

No, he didn't, and if he had it would have capital letters as he made the switch from the Liberal party to the Conservative party. These two parties would not easily fit into the definitions of the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' that you use.

[Antibubba]

To quote Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and maybe a few others, "Liberalism is a mental disorder"

And Ann is someone who would know a great deal about mental disorders.

[El Tejon]

Only if her complete ignorance of history is counted as a mental disorder.

[gunsmith]

I like Anne.(I Like SAVAGE NATION better)
I like guns.
However, I hate second hand smoke and perfume/cologne.

The problem is liberals really think mike moore is presenting the truth in bowling for columbine.

they can not admit to themselves that they are far away from pro choice, politically a liberals idea of choice is a starbucks soy latte or a starbucks frappachino.
If you choose beef stew you are trying to destroy the planet.

they do not understand that guns are not a public danger because they have to much invested in their outlook to change. It really does appear to be some kind of mental disorder.

For instance, with all the real oppression women and gays get from talibanistic islamofascism
one would think the majority of gays and women would be cheering their destruction
yet N.O.W and ACT UP have so much invested in evil bad republicans
they can't see that we are fighting for their survival.

The Lacy Peterson case a few years ago, planned parenthood (I believe, or some big pro baby killing org) came out against a double murder charge for her husband after he killed her in her 9th month
because it could lend creedence to pro lifers.

One of the things that swung me to the conservative side when I was a total NYC liberal
was a case that few remember in the early 80's.
Reagan intervened after a baby with down syndrome was allowed to starve to death in a hospital.
The parents had decided they didn't want it and got a post natal abortion
the doctors,nurses and parents just left the baby alone till it died of starvation and loneliness
...no one in NYC  could see my pov that even though the baby was going to die that it should be held,comforted and fed, because they were so married to their "right to choose"

Sometimes I really feel like the savage in brave new world

And this liberal fixation with molding children into their brave new world
I remember being six and I really didn't have any need to be force fed gender identification
why all this focus on molding the sexuality of little kids?
I can see teaching teens the basics of reproduction but why force little kids
to confront ideas beyond their scope?

Everyday it seems like we hear of some 7 year old (boy) getting a severe punishment for drawing a stick figure with a gun, I guess he would get a star if he said it was a penis

you can talk to liberals, if you remember to take your blood pressure medication

[Nitrogen]

To quote Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and maybe a few others, "Liberalism is a mental disorder"

Disagreeing with someone is fine.  Saying that people that disagree with you have something wrong with them mentally is disingenuous.  We all have our countries best interests at heartl it's just that some of us are wrong about it.

[gunsmith]

Saying that people that disagree with you have something wrong with them mentally is disingenuous.

crazy people always say that.

[geronimotwo]

Saying that people that disagree with you have something wrong with them mentally is genius.

here, i changed it to be more in line with the average 2nd grader mentallity.

[Perd Hapley]

We all have our countries best interests at heartl it's just that some of us are wrong about it.

No, we don't all have the country's best interest at heart.  Wife-beaters say they love their wives.  And they think they really do. 

[Manedwolf]

Everyday it seems like we hear of some 7 year old (boy) getting a severe punishment for drawing a stick figure with a gun, I guess he would get a star if he said it was a penis rolleyes

No, those are bad too, now.

As mentioned in another thread, they had to caution about the early Sesame Street, because Gordon, a kindhearted-seeming MAN, apparently kindly took a lost girl home to meet his wife and give her milk and cookies.

These days, a MAN cannot do such things, or even talk to a lost child, lest it be possible (likely) sexual abuse.

If you possess one of the aforementioned anatomical features, you are automatically under suspicion of being a horrible rapist or child abuser.

Kind of ironically predictable. Just like guns, to the ultra-leftist sorts, if you have one in your pants, it means you must have intent to do evil things with it.

[Nitrogen]

We all have our countries best interests at heartl it's just that some of us are wrong about it.

No, we don't all have the country's best interest at heart.  Wife-beaters say they love their wives.  And they think they really do. 

Are you seriously comparing people you disagree with to wife beaters?

I could just as easily compare people that hate all liberals to racists, in the same way.
It's just as invalid of a comparison.

George Bush, and his cohorts honestly think by taking away our God-given rights, they are making our country safer.  They are WRONG.  Just like many liberals think that taking away guns makes everyone safer.  They honestly believe that, and they are demonstratively wrong.

Talking to people you disagree with is never a bad thing.  They might learn something from you.
(You might learn something from them, too.)

Our founding fathers managed to work out comprimise amongst some pretty stiff disagreement on how this country should look.  We're a better country for it.  Like many here point out, we should follow their examples.

[wooderson]

Kind of ironically predictable. Just like guns, to the ultra-leftist sorts, if you have one in your pants, it means you must have intent to do evil things with it.

Oh, gosh "ultra-leftists!"

Traditionally, "ultra-leftists" have been ambivalent toward or supportive of guns. Remember those evil Black Panthers and how they dared arm themselves (or do we just bring up the "gun control is racist in origin" stuff when it suits our purposes)? The history of the American left is littered with activists, organizers and common folk who armed themselves in self-defense. If you were going to organize in the mines of West Virginia, you certainly wanted something under your pillow at night.

Gun control is currently the domain of (some) liberals and centrists, and a few conservatives - people for whom the state (as it exists) can act as a solution. Believing in the goodness of the constituted state is not exactly a common ideological line among the 'left,' much less the 'ultra-left.'

Your use of political terminology is amusingly incorrect so often, I hate to correct you.

[Tallpine]

You can't really talk to "conservatives" either 

[Nitrogen]

You can't really talk to "conservatives" either 

And it's a shame.

Conservatives are right on quite a few issues.  (Gun rights, illiegal immigration, most national defense issues to start with.)

[Manedwolf]

You can't really talk to "conservatives" either 

Traditional conservatives will listen to an argument for change, and then decide whether that change is a good thing, or whether the status quo is better, with a bias towards maintaining the stability of the status quo if it's not broken.

Hence, "conservative".

Liberals are the ones trying to turn every social institution of the country's very fabric on its head, consequences be damned. Thankfully, they also don't see the coming backlash.

[Paddy]

Thankfully, they also don't see the coming backlash.

The backlash is coming against conservatives.  It's already started in Australia, and will continue until 'conservatism' is small enough to take what's left of it into the bathroom and drown it in the toilet bowl.

[Nitrogen]

Thankfully, they also don't see the coming backlash.

The backlash is coming against conservatives.  It's already started in Australian, and will continue until 'conservatism' is small enough to take what's left of it into the bathroom and drown it in the toilet bowl.

That's what happens when conservatives take things too far.  It always happens.
The backlash will continue against conservatives until liberals then take things too far, and the process starts all over again.

[Manedwolf]

Thankfully, they also don't see the coming backlash.

The backlash is coming against conservatives.  It's already started in Australia, and will continue until 'conservatism' is small enough to take what's left of it into the bathroom and drown it in the toilet bowl.

Australia? Where the population is now disarmed? Yes, it's definitely being taken over by leftists.

[yesitsloaded]

There is a big difference between true conservatives and the neo-cons. But don't tell the neo-cons that or they will brand you a terrorist and remove your right to speak out against them.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

There is a big difference between true conservatives and the neo-cons. But don't tell the neo-cons that or they will brand you a terrorist and remove your right to speak out against them.

you mean like they've silenced you?

[Perd Hapley]

We all have our countries best interests at heartl it's just that some of us are wrong about it.

No, we don't all have the country's best interest at heart.  Wife-beaters say they love their wives.  And they think they really do. 

Are you seriously comparing people you disagree with to wife beaters? 

Yes.  Are you seriously trying to make me feel bad about it?