Liberals never cease to amaze me by how completely spineless they are and also just a complete joke.
For months they have been bashing the President saying he had no plan for Iraq. Now their leader in the House is saying the Dems will offer no position on Iraq in their 2006 agenda. Not only will they not have a plan, but she is even trying to say by not having a plan shows a sign of strength.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with they see things turning around, so they don't want to put out a negative plan and look like idiots again. Also they can't put out a plan that supports what is now happening because then that would show support for the President...definitely can't have that. It must be so hard having to hope for defeat in order to advance your party.
Welcome to Bizarro world also known as Liberals in America.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
Makes no sense, but somehow people agree with the dems wholeheartedly (at least here in Austin). I did move into my new place. My Nazi Ex-landlord was appeased with several hundreds of dollars.
The point is Liberals are just pretty much dumb. They are always looking out for thier own -ss. Well, that about sums it up in my mind. Anyway, are you liking the Narnia books?
That definitely pretty much sums it up.
Yeah, they are good...I'm on Prince Caspian right now. I've posted my thougths on the first three a few posts back.
DKL-
I do not wish to turn this blog into a contentious arena, but you can please elaborate? I consider myself somewhat liberal, and by no stretch do I consider myself "dumb." Nor do I think the label applies to my mother, father, sister...you get the point.
And I know where my -ss is, at least most of the time.
So, what's a liberal doing here? I like to keep informed of all views, and when possible, engage in a discussion that extends beyond rhetoric.
Feel up to it?
Southpaw...
Post a link to your blog and I'll return the favor of visiting and creating discussion.
I'll let "dkl" know you called her out and see if she'll come back to respond.
BTW...thanks in advance for keeping it clean b/c my lil sis reads periodically.
www.southpawspot.blogspot.com
southpaw-
Oh yeah I'm up for it!!!
Maybe you aren't maybe you are...but if you describe yourself as a liberal then you get clumped in with the likes of Michael Moore and Al Franken who definitely fit that description.
As far as your -ss...i would hope you would always know where it is, but i didn't say they were looking for it...saying they were trying to cover it!
Basically my point is that liberals will take whatever position they think people will like most and don't stand for anything on principle.
-DKL
DKL-
I do not see an intellectual discussion developing between us. You are clearly a slave to stereotypes, with no facts or evidence to back up your statements.
I personally think Al Franken is great. Michael Moore is a good filmmaker. But I will not lump you in with the likes of Ann Coulter or Bill O'Reily, even though your style warrants such a classification- lumping all liberals together, hurling insults that are far from true.
Liberals stand on strong principles- that government should provide for its people when necessary, and that society will function better when social services improve.
As far as "taking the position they think people will like most," I can name conservative after conservative that has a track record of the same behavior- Bill Frist comes to mind.
If you want to continue our discussion, please evolve past simple insults and banal expressions.
Southpaw...
Well when you call yourself a liberal you are automatically linked to those who also claim the same beliefs. It's not my fault there are so many wackos on the left. I can't think of one conservative I'd mind being compared to.
The only thing great about Franklen is that he was really funny on SNL. He should have stayed in comedy b/c he is completely out of his league trying to compete with the likes of Rush and Hannity. To say that Moore is a good filmmaker doesn't even merit comment...he is a pure propagandist.
To be compared to Coulter is a very high compliment because she rocks!!! O'Reilly isn't nearly conservative for my tastes...let's go with Hannity instead and I'd be happier.
Frist isn't necessarily my fav Senator anyway...Sen. Coburn or Sen. Allen would better fit my description of a principled conservative. All we have to do is look at the war though and besides Sen. Lieberman, you can't name one liberal Senator who has not changed positions on Iraq due to the falsely perceived notion that the Iraq war is now going bad.
DKL does make a very good point. I can't think of one nationally known conservative I'd mind being compared to. However there are plenty liberals like Moore, Franken, Howard Dean...I could go on and on...who I'm sure plenty liberals cringe whenever they speak.
I mean even Kerry in the race fought touth and nail to not be labeled as a liberal after he was named the 3rd most liberal Senator. That's pretty bad when even Kerry doesn't want to be called a liberal.
DKL-
you say:
"Well when you call yourself a liberal you are automatically linked to those who also claim the same beliefs. "
Says who? you?
Maybe in YOUR mind that is the way things work, but it's a pretty broad statement.
"I can't think of one conservative I'd mind being compared to."
Living or dead? How about David Duke? Joseph McCarthy? George Wallace?
Senator Coburn? the man who referred to the Oscar-winning film about the Holocaust, Schindler's List, as pornographic?
It's a lost cause for us to banter back and forth about liberal vs. conservative ideologies. But I am challenging you to have an open mind about not only me and my ideals, but everyones. Again, I ask you to try and discuss issues with facts, not stereotypes, and to a lesser degree, opinnions. Opinnions are hard to avoid- but I am beginning to wonder if you know the difference between opinnion and fact.
Now, what was the issue again?
The issue was Dems have no plans for Iraq and brag about it...hypocrisy at its finest =)
Carry on...
Southpaw-
In a format like this broad statements are what you make...it is impossible to go down and list every single person and discuss their beliefs. So when you label yourself a liberal as I label myself a conservative, you are painted with a broad brush in this medium. Get over it.
I still don't get why liberals fight so hard to not be called a liberal. But then again if Howard Dean were the head of my party I'd be pretty embarrassed as well.
As far as your attempt at painting me broadly, Duke is not a conservative, he is a fascist...big difference even though most liberals (if the shoe fits) try to make them the same. McCarthy and Wallace (wasn't he a Democrat?) are way before more time, and nothing they said or did influences modern conservatives and they especially didn’t in any way influence Reagan (my personal hero and the epitome of a true conservative), so another weak attempt to paint broadly. Care to try again?
I agree it is a lost cause to get you to admit the error of your ways and we have now probably come to the "agree to disagree" stage, but I'm just having so much fun. The fact is that I'm a conservative. I'm very proud of it and never shrink from being called one.
-happy new year
You favor painting with broad brushes...Forsaking individuality...lumping people into large groups based on beliefs...
What was that you were saying about Facism?
I DON'T fight not to be called a liberal. And I will NOT "get over it."
You use such language as "the error of my ways," when I have never once insulted your beliefs or political ideology.
Wallace was a Democrat. Before the 1990s, there were many conservative democrats, and, (gasp!) liberal republicans.
You're proud to be a conservative, then good for you. You should be proud of who you are.
"In a format like this broad statements are what you make..." YOU may choose to do so. Speech, and free speech, is what you make of it. I think the host of this blog would agree with me when I say that if someone were to take the time to make a well-detailed, well thought out statement, complete with fine points and strong convictions, it would not be unwelcome.
Perhaps you make broad brushes because you are incapable of making finer points?
Prove me wrong.
Hey...leave me out of this...ya'll are both on your own here.
As a politician I would think you would know better than to make general comments about anyone, even if they are your opponents. Both sides have strong points and both sides have weak points. After all, it was you conservatives that got us into this mess...
Anonymous-
I assume you are speaking to me when refering to "As a politician."
First off I'm not a politician, so not sure where that came from. I do work in politics though, so your address while not completely accurate is applicable.
As argued in other comments under this post, it would be impossible to go down through every rank and file person and agree or argue with.
So in this format, generalities are the norm. I concede that not every liberal is an idiot, and that by using generalities you are mainly trying to paint a picture of your opponents.
As DKL pointed out, I don't see any prominent conservatives fighting tooth and nail to not be called a conservative, but are instead rather proud of that label.
It is only liberals who almost alwasy seem offended when called a liberal and it appears you fall into that category as well by not defending the position of no plan and instead just trying to attack conservatives.
"It is only liberals who almost alwasy seem offended when called a liberal and it appears you fall into that category as well by not defending the position of no plan and instead just trying to attack conservatives."
First off, this is extremely irrelevent. My point was to express how it shows weakness in your arguement to make statements like what DKL said, "liberals are just pretty much dumb. They are always looking out for their own -ss." How could this statement not be applied to conservatives? If you are going to talk about dumb conservatives, look at DeLay or Abramoff. Even our own President has had less that bright moments. I believe in the political arena, since corruption is widespread as you have cited on numerous occassions, it is more effective and accurate to pinpoint specific events rather than a general population. It was not my intention to declare the either party as more intelligent or effective politicians, but rather to express that neither is perfect.
Anonymous-
I did just what you asked...I pointed to a specific item with this post yet that point has never been addressed by either yourself or southpaw.
DKL made a general off-the-cuff comment about that specific point and instead of addressing the point at all ya'll both attack her for saying something everyone says at one time or the other about the other party.
Not to speak for DKL, but I'm sure she didn't really mean that ALL liberals are dumb and that they aren't the only ones who are just looking to cover their own -ss. However instead of addressing the point she was making light of, ya'll attack that general off-the-cuff comment.
How about we concede the point that both parties have idiots and both parties do things that aren't in the best interest of the people they are supposed to be serving and get back to the point of this post?
"Both sides have strong points and both sides have weak points. "
didn't i say that from the beginning???
southpaw -
Alright...I guess I'll concede that not ALL liberals are dumb...I'm sure one or two might have some intelligence.
Also I agree completely with you on the fact that it's a lost cause for us to banter back and forth about liberal vs. conservative ideologies. I think it is obvious that we will never see eye to eye. Simply because you are on the left side and i'm on the right. Neither one of us is going to give the other a good enough reason to cross over to the other side.
It's pointless to go on with our petty political arguments. It really doesn't accomplish anything. So I will be the one to end this, agree to disagree.
Post a Comment