Ultimate College Softball
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 18      1   2   3   4   Next   »
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #1 
I'm starting a new thread where I will post articles that demonstrate why liberalism and its policies are harmful to this country.  I don't plan to get into the debate that ensues but, then again, I said I wouldn't post again until there was a Republican in the White House so who knows.

Here are the first two articles:

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/011513-640692-california-birth-dearth-threatens-economic-future.htm

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/01/15/liberalism-versus-blacks-n1489212


__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,417
Reply with quote  #2 
Nice. Good luck keeping up with all the FAIL in OConMan's un-American Socialist repertoire - you've set a mighty large task for yourself.
__________________
There are problems in these times, but, oh, none of them are mine.
- Velvet Underground
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #3 
I'm shooting for consistency over comprehensiveness.  No shortage of fodder.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #4 
This may be a satisfying endeavor but as I've been saying, this message is outdated.  It's my opinion the voters are less interested in how you feel about the opposition and more interested in what your philosophy has to offer on behalf of the many problems we face today along with the solutions being considered.
ice_67

Registered:
Posts: 144
Reply with quote  #5 

I’m plagiarizing, but I like how it describes socialism/liberism on why it doesn’t work.

One, It is morally wrong to take anything that doesn’t belong to you and having the State do the taking doesn’t magically make it okay or right.

Two, Socialism has been tried repeatedly and has never worked, anywhere. Yet each new crop of elites think they can enact socialism and this time it will be different. They stick the socialist fork back in the electrical outlet expecting a totally different outcome, but it always ends the same.

Three, when people become reliant on the state, the reliance erodes their self-respect, their sense of worth, their work ethic, and their independence.

Finally, socialism promotes class envy and class warfare. The makers resent the takers for draining their resources and the takes resent the makers because no matter how much the takers take, they always want more. They erroneously believe the makers have an abundant supply from which they should be continuously compelled to give. But as Maggie Thatcher so aptly put it, the problem with socialsm is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

 

Wolfpackfan

Registered:
Posts: 1,918
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LMUfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ice_67
Yet each new crop of elites think they can enact socialism and this time it will be different.



I don't believe for a single minute that these guys think socialism will work.  These guys are smart, very smart, and smart people know enough to know that socialism is a dead end.  The ONLY thing they care about is getting reelected.  They know that stealing from the rich to give to the poor is very popular and this mantra will keep them in office even though they know there's not enough money in the rich to do what they promise.  IT'S ALL ABOUT VOTES. PERIOD.  Getting reelected is job one, taking care of America is far, far down the list.
Bingo!!!! Perfect Assessment!

__________________
Go Pack!!!!!!!!!!!
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #7 
Dewey - exactly the arrogant reply I expected from you.  You would prefer to lecture us what and how to argue and belittle us by telling us that the "message is outdated".  This is what liberals do - they argue the argument because trying to argue the merits of the actual position leaves them exposed to their hypocrisies.

It just so happens that, in this case, the opposition is leading us down the road of France, Greece, et al and it's beneficial to let the "voters" know what's happening to them.

__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #8 
http://www.myfoxny.com/story/20603065/southwestern-pa-hospital-to-stop-baby-deliveries
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 9,799
Reply with quote  #9 
Glad to see you back Pabar!
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,055
Reply with quote  #10 
Read my signature and you will see one of the many reasons I hate liberalism.
Ohh noooo He said "hate"! The haters are out in full force!!
There ya go masardinger, I beat ya to it.

__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #11 
Good one Grizz.

The fact is, which Grizz points out, is that we conservatives don't hate liberalism or liberals.  We fear liberalism and we don't understand liberals.

Liberals and conservatives are similar in that neither want suffering or misery or inequality.  Where we diverge is that liberals believe they can use government to manufacture equality and conservatives believe that the individual, freed of all governmental restraints, should have the liberty to pursue happiness even if that does not guarantee equality for all.  We believe in the equality of opportunity and liberals believe in equality of outcome.

That is why liberals support, for example, racial quotas even when it doesn't benefit the intended beneficiary.  But more evidence will follow in future posts.

__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 9,714
Reply with quote  #12 
I don't fear liberalism I am disgusted by it. A whole political/social culture based on reward for no work and power through oppression of those you profess to help.

How does any man get raised with such philosophy and how does he look in the mirror with a sense of pride and accomplishment?
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61
  We fear liberalism and we don't understand liberals.



pabar - I know you don't fully enjoy hearing from me but anytime you want to ask this Progressive a question, to help you better understand thinking from the left, feel free.  The reason I so enjoy forums like these is that it gives me an opportunity to learn what others think and to share my own perspectives.  I'm not sure how many others around here have the same interest as you, with regards to trying to seriously learn what makes people like me tick, but I'm more than willing to share my thoughts anytime you're interested.  Feel free to ask.  Of course, by the many inquiries I've posted in other threads, you may see I have the same interest trying to understand those on the Right but few seem eager to share.  Have a good evening.

PS:  If you read closer, you will see Grizzly admitted to hating Liberalism.

PS II:  spazsdad - Your comment is akin to me asking how any Conservative can look himself in the mirror absent any compassion for his fellow man?  It would be difficult, if it were true, and it is as poor and inaccurate of a conclusion as the one you made above.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #14 
Dewey - my responses to your posts are not measured on an enjoyment scale.  They're measured on a belief scale with most of my responses falling on the side of disbelief.  My feelings about liberals are derived from what I see occur in the governments that pursue liberal/progressive/socialist policies, not on what you or others on this thread say.  I respect and will always defend your right to express your opinions even as I can't understand how you can have those opinions.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #15 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabar61
Dewey - I respect and will always defend your right to express your opinions even as I can't understand how you can have those opinions.


Fair enough, but if you have ever have a desire to better understand, feel free to ask.  Good night.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,417
Reply with quote  #16 
Dewey, your reply to Spazsdad is one of the Great Lies of Liberalism. Conservatives have plenty of compassion for the truly needy. We simply draw the line at truly needy, whereas the libs want government to support as many as possible, even when the government can no longer afford that support.

So it's easy to look in the mirror knowing we do our part for the truly needy, and we really aren't happy that so much of what we do contribute is siphoned away from the most needy and handed out to many who won't help themselves.

__________________
There are problems in these times, but, oh, none of them are mine.
- Velvet Underground
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 9,714
Reply with quote  #17 
Dewey,
The mantra of the left that conservatives have no compassion for their fellow man Is just more of the class warfare they profess. A hand up is not the same as a handout, the later leading to dependence which is the goal of the liberal power brokers since it leads to more dependant voters. It has been shown time and time again that conservatives, on the political leadership level, donate more to charity than thier liberal counterparts.. Why is that so? Why do characters like Al Gore and Joe Biden give a mere pittance to charity while professing their desire to help others? Why do the libs insist on telling others how to live their lives while they do not follow thier own edicts?
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
Dewey, your reply to Spazsdad is one of the Great Lies of Liberalism. Conservatives have plenty of compassion for the truly needy.


ForeverInBlue - I believe you, at least those who don't call them leeches or moochers.  I was comparing one ludicrous conclusion with another to make a point.  You see, spazsdad said this...

How does any man get raised with such philosophy and how does he look in the mirror with a sense of pride and accomplishment?

as if he is properly describing the belief of a Progressive.

PS:  You did read the aberration earlier, didn't you.  Grizzly said 51% of Americans or more are moochers, leeches, needy, or whatever.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,417
Reply with quote  #19 
I have no idea of a % of "whatever" except that it's way beyond the "truly needy" in our society and represents a significant drain on our resources and our ability to help those who truly need our help.

I don't subscribe to the euphemistic "progressive."

And I agree with Spazsdad that a great many of the "whatever" % should have a difficult time taking realistic stock of their contributions to society, or more accurately their failure to contribute.

__________________
There are problems in these times, but, oh, none of them are mine.
- Velvet Underground
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
I have no idea of a % of "whatever" except that it's way beyond the "truly needy" in our society and represents a significant drain on our resources and our ability to help those who truly need our help.


ForeverInBlue - Let's talk about the "truly needy".  First off, let me agree with you that those drawing UE who make no effort to find a job should not be given assistance.  I've told you numerous times you've won me over on this issue.  But let's move beyond these folks.  By the way, in the churches and community centers, do they turn these supposed deadbeats away?  Do those offering their heartfelt assistance in these centers grill the people regarding how hard they search for work?  Never-mind, maybe that's a different discussion for another day. 

Many times you've noted how wages have gone down over the years.  It's been a great talking point to lay at the feet of this President, as if he is totally responsible.  In any event, what is your opinion on the full time family of four worker earning $22,000 annually?  Is this a needy person deserving assistance or not?  How about those out of work nearly two years in the worst recession of our lifetime?  Do they fit the bill of the "truly needy"?  I understand the argument over single women with multiple children but, that aside, are the children "truly needy"?

Many fully employed people have no health insurance and no ability to afford it.  Are these people "truly needy" or not?  How about the sick or disabled who cannot work?  I can go on and on but, outside of the second sentence in my first paragraph, I'm uncertain who your target group is.  Please provide me with your list of undeserving moochers who my side is willing to support for no reason whatsoever.  At the very least, define them for me.  I can't begin to believe they make up the majority in this Country.  Please spell it out for me.  Like I said in another thread, I truly appreciate what I learn in our forum and I yearn to learn more.  It's one thing to say we can't afford to help those in need and quite a different to claim these people aren't in need.  Help me out here.  I'm with you.  I want to assist the needy and not waste more money than necessary on those who choose to do nothing.  I'll admit my side is not willing to let the absolute deadbeats simply die and even they will get medical care.  If this is where we differ, then say so.  If it's more than this, help me understand.  Thanks.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 34,301
Reply with quote  #21 
pabar, please continue the research in your thread.  I find it fascinating, and sad.  Avoid those who will derail and hijack the discussion of the original intent.  This thread did not ask "what makes liberal loons tick"?.  That is a diversion. 

LMUfan's comparison to pigeons in the park is hard to argue with.

__________________

Shut up doofus. Not talking to you. 
 
mikec

Registered:
Posts: 9,799
Reply with quote  #22 
So, this week Lawrence O'Donnell says we shoudl not use the Bible during the inaguration anymore, because "No one in America believes what's in there".

Then, Bob Schiefer compares taking on the Gun Lobby (ooh, scary) to the 1960's Civil Rights Movement, hunting Bin Laden, and defeating the Nazis.

And, the Pastor who was to give the prayer at the inaguration has been bumped because, God forbid, he gave a sermon 10 years ago that called homosexuality a sin.

Quite frankly, I do not know how these alledged journalists get away with this stuff.  It actually makes me ill.

This country is crashing and burning.  It scares the hell out of me.
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,055
Reply with quote  #23 
Dewey I have no compassion for those "needy" in YOUR party who are standing in line waiting for their "Obamabucks" Those able bodied men who have 9 babies by 7 baby mamas who drain our system. The fat arsed chick praising Obama for her Obamaphone and scamming FEMA out of money claiming her basement flooded. The sleaze bag bimbos like Sandra Fluke who claim she spends $3000 a year on condoms and someone else should pay for them. The able bodied people who have increased our disability roles by 9,000,000 over the last 4 years. The teacher who works for 20-30 years and retires with a $67,000 a year pension and free health insurance.
In other words I have no compassion for the moochers, leeches, and parasites who demand more from the fruits of my labor in order to pay for their free ride. ie: the democRAT voter base.
With that said, I would wager that I give more to charity each year than YOU have given over the last 20 years combined. I have compassion for those who can't help themselves. I have disdain for those who won't.

__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 15,198
Reply with quote  #24 
It's laughable when liberals paint conservatives as not being compassionate when study after study after study clearly shows that when it comes to charitable giving, conservatives are far more compassionate than liberals.  Clearly, liberals are very comfortable being charitable with other people's money and conservatives prefer the option of putting their money where their mouths are.

Back to the original purpose.  Here is a not-at-all surprising report on how poorly run the food stamps program is:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/17/us-usa-foodstamps-idUSBRE90G18D20130117


__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #25 
classic liberalism.  Money for funny science to back agenda, ideology, power,VOTES, vs doing whats right.

http://www.bit.ly/11DVlWP


__________________
Susan
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #26 
ForeverInBlue - I noted how the conclusion that Progressives lacked ambition and pride was as inaccurate and unfair as saying Conservatives have no compassion.  I think the members totally missed the point.

keepinitreal - Start a thread presenting SEC sports in a negative manner, ask folks to please refrain from challenging the biased and inaccurate descriptions listed, and see how far it gets you.  Like I once told another member, if only you could say what you wanted to say and go unchallenged.  You can...just send PM's amongst the few of you and we'll never see them.
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,417
Reply with quote  #27 
Dewey, it looks like a few folks got back to you before I had a chance. I'm going with kiir here in avoiding a tit for tat over links and stats that might prove one case over the other, but rather stay in the broader discussion of why liberalism doesn't work.
You agree on the UE part, and that's a significant drain on resources. There are other programs in addition to UE that these same people siphon money from - food stamps, general relief, health clinics are probably a few. Every dollar they take hurts those truly in need, and hurts America.
You agree on mothers having additional children, and that's a huge drain on resources. They are eligible for just about every program out there, and the problem is the liberal agenda that incentivizes additional children. More kids = more everything, and that's fundamentally unsound. Who suffers? Everyone, from the truly needy to the overly burdened taxpayer to local state and national government.
You mention a family of four, assuming a husband, wife and two children, living on $22k, I would say a few things. One, they aren't at a point in life in which they should be having children. The couple, without children, could probably do fine and advance their careers to a point they can afford children. But having children removes a paycheck from the equation, plus brings myriad expenses that burden the family unit. Liberals subscribe to a theory that this family is now society's burden, and that is fundamentally unsound. Now you have children growing up in poverty, being indoctrinated in welfare ideology, learning how to game the system, more likely to engage in crime and go to jail, etc. So the burden goes well beyond just the dollars they siphon off in support.
Liberals incentivize the above by making it easier to obtain funds and services, when the opposite should be true. The guy on UE ticks a few boxes and money appears on his ATM card. That's too easy! In CA I think UE applicants have to register on a jobs databank, but there's no follow up to that. Why don't they track jobs applied for via the databank? Why don't recipients have to submit alist of jobs they apply for every week? Clinton had Workfare, much of that has been rescinded. Why?
Just as you can go on and on, I can too. But the point is every dollar these programs use siphons money away from those who need it most, from education, from civic funds, street maintenance, etc, and liberals strive to expand these services by making them easier to obtain. That's fundamentally unsound, and many would argue morally irresponsible. It leads to institutionalized dependence on the state, where working the welfare system becomes a way of life. And that's only a part of the overall ideological problem. Add in the drain caused by illegal immigration. Add in the drain caused by ill-advised so-called "War on Drugs." etc etc.
And the problem isn't just resources being wasted, they are being diverted from other programs that could move society forward like education, jobs training, health and scientific research, etc. and since we are already broke, they add to the national debt crisis, and interest payments.
The impact of the items you agree are problematic go far beyond the singular issues. When Conservatives want to rein any of this in, they are evil and lack compassion. I call BS on that. We as a country can not continue expanding these programs, as the liberals insist we can. We have no money. Read it again - we have no money. Why are we expanding programs that don't work when we have to borrow the money to pay for them? Liberals launched a War on Poverty 50 years ago and yet we are surrounded by poverty and it's cohort, crime. The idea that throwing more money into a solution that hasn't worked for 50 years is going to somehow fix the problems is complete insanity. Even Obama has said something must be done with SS and Medicare, but he never seems ready to address the problem. First he wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy before addressing cuts. Now he wants to raise the debt limit before addressing cuts. Next he'll want to significantly weaken the military before addressing cuts to social programs. It's always something, and in the meantime the problems keep getting worse. Why can't you see that? What part of "we have no money" doesn't compute in the liberal mind? How did institutionalizing government dependency help society? How does expanding programs fraught with fraud better society?
There are hard lessons to be learned, and hard times presently and looming in the future. Our failure to address key elements of unsound policy only exacerbates the damage, ongoing and in the future. We need sound strategies to wean Americans off the government teat, and we need them now. That view doesn't come from a lack of compassion, but rather an abundance of compassion. What we are doing now isn't working. We aren't stopping poverty, we are feeding it. Society doesn't benefit from the current system, but it seems like liberals have so much invested in the ideology that they can't admit to a problem, or to the extent of the problem. 'That' viewpoint lacks compassion.

__________________
There are problems in these times, but, oh, none of them are mine.
- Velvet Underground
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #28 
Charlie - Beautiful !!!!   Talking about defining terms in favor of a personal perspective !!!
I surrender if any debate is relevant to your terms.  

I do fear that your definition of terms is more a statement than an objective platform for debate.         Frank  

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #29 
You're a good man Charlie Brown !!!!!  I cannot help but get serious for a second and say that all discourse on this thread should be as amiable as that which you and I have the good fortune to share. All disagreement in theory does not have to be argued in the gutter.     Frank
PS - I will vote for any politician who will create oversight that eliminates thievery in both blue and white collar welfare.  

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverInBlue
Dewey, it looks like a few folks got back to you before I had a chance. I'm going with kiir here in avoiding a tit for tat over links and stats that might prove one case over the other, but rather stay in the broader discussion of why liberalism doesn't work. You agree on the UE part, and that's a significant drain on resources. There are other programs in addition to UE that these same people siphon money from - food stamps, general relief, health clinics are probably a few. Every dollar they take hurts those truly in need, and hurts America.


ForeverInBlue - What I agree with is that one can find abuses in everything and I would agree with taking the steps necessary to reduce the abuse.  I don't agree the abuse is anywhere near the level you are suggesting. 

You're right that tit for tat will do little good as once someone says most persons receiving assistance are abusing the system, there's no chance of convincing them otherwise.  In my mind, it isn't true.  But that still doesn't address any solution.  Maybe a woman has too many kids but do we really want to take the food from the children?  Stop unemployment in the greatest recession of our time because some aren't trying to find a job?  I know, I know, no tit for tat.  Let me just close with something I experience in my life knowing many business owners.  I know far, and by far I mean the ratio isn't even close, more businesses who pay cash to employees to avoid payroll taxes and workman's comp, hire illegal immigrants to save money, pay part time individuals cash to enable them to earn unemployment thus remaining available to the employer when needed, and/or who apply personal expenses to their business ledger to reduce taxes, than I know individuals getting unemployment who really don't want to go to work.  Again, we should address all abuse in our system but, in my opinion, you're way too focused on the small fish.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.