It seems like liberals are so concerned with with their own agendas. They want me to think that they know what's best for me better than I do. What's with all the government intervention? Can't they see the long term damage their ideas cause?
2006-08-09
07:53:07
·
41 answers
·
asked by
smutulator
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Typical Liberal Kneejerk responses.. NOBODY took the time to read the question and think about it.. You just went and posted your stupid little "I know you are but what am I?" responses.
I especially like the response: "o you stupid"
Well THERE'S an intelligent response! You're not helping the liberals image by acting childish, like I knew you would.
You have fallen into my plan perfectly...
Mwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
2006-08-09
08:08:07 ·
update #1
coragryph: I agree with most of that.. but I believe the liberals are all about government regulation.
2006-08-09
08:12:38 ·
update #2
EXAMPLE: Ok.. you want an example? Here's an easy one. Universal health care. Sounds like a good idea. Government gives everyone health care. Everyone can get healthy because the government is giving you healthcare. But wait. We're all concerned about governemtn spending. We're all concerned about taxes. As we should be. Universal health care would raise your taxes!!!. How do you think the government is going to pay for the universal health care? Also, with everyone's taxes going up.. so will prices, after all they have to pay their taxes too. So now the government has to pay MORE for the healthcare. Where's THAT money come from? You betcha.. taxes! So, less money in your pocket, because you have to pay all these higher taxes to pay for your new health care plan the government has forced on you, which incidently put a lot of health care providers out of business, so with less money you spend less. Spending less, causes a recession. Recessions cause lost jobs.
2006-08-09
08:17:54 ·
update #3
Tukko 2- Stem Cell research is a bad example. It was President Bush who was the FIRST president to authorize funding for that. But nice try.
2006-08-09
08:28:56 ·
update #4
I haven't finished reading the answers yet.. but let me tackle a couple of things.
First: Thanks for all the attacks on me. That really makes a lot of sense. And is shows your maturity level.
Second: A lot of blaming of the current administration for things going on here, though i'm not surprised. Someone even blamed them for 9/11 and the conflict between hezbollah (which helped distribute Michael Moore's film on 9/11) and Israel. How can you blame the current administration for something that has been brewing for years before they were elected? Short sightedness I would imagine.
Third: I see someone bringing up the "Bush didn't win the popular vote" argument. A lovely fallback. But untrue. BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE STAYED HOME THAT DAY! So the "popular" vote... was not even cast.
2006-08-09
08:39:15 ·
update #5
gbkarr87: (page 2)
Wow, what you described is a beautiful thought. But communism just doesn't work. Look at the soviet union. Socialism is only the stepping stone TOWARD communism (Sorry Michael Moore).
But yes, the thought of all the countries standing together holding hands, sharing their assets, and singing koombaya is a beuatiful picture.
2006-08-09
08:43:20 ·
update #6
Saturn622, thank you for your definition. That just opened my mind. You CLEARLY explained why we went into Iraq. What you DIDN'T explain is why it was a conservative president that did it instead of a liberal president. According to your answer.. it would have been expected from a liberal president, and yet, no liberal president had the balls to do it.
Thanks. I feel much better now.
2006-08-09
08:48:34 ·
update #7
Be more specific next time....and Thanks for the 2 points.
2006-08-09 07:57:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
... what?
who's running up a RECORD debt and invading people's privacy in the name of "security" and much, much more...
I've not seen anyone from the democratic party COME CLOSE TO EVEN VERBALIZING THE SAME LONG-TERM DANGEROUS IDEAS THAT THE CONSERVATIVES HAVE ACCEPTED WITH OPEN ARMS...
2006-08-09 08:01:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
why can't conservatives see the big picture and the long term effects of their actions? it seems like conservatives are so concerned with their own agendas. they want me to think that they know what's best for me better than i do. what's with all the government intervention? can't they see the long term damage their ideas cause?
its a political dichotomy; some liberals, including myself, acknowledge this.
2006-08-09 08:07:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by barbsmonsta 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that you should look at the other side. Liberals are not in power and the conservatives have two wars going on right now (three including Lebanon which they no doubt caused with their policies).
The Conservative say they believe in pre emptive strikes but they are certainly not taking on Iran and, from all reports-the con. press releases, this is going to be the next bugaboo. But they've used up the nation's treasure both in people and money in trying to subdue Iran and Afghanistan and are getting nowhere.
Liberals didn't cause these fiascoes!
2006-08-09 08:04:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by gshewman 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i see the big picture but don't consider myself totally liberal. I'm sick of the GOP screwing stuff up, you think they're doing what's best for you? The rich get richer and the poor get bombed. This government needs intervention before we piss off too many more people and bad things happen to all of us.
2006-08-09 08:03:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by hmb9605 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
What makes you so sure that we aren't the ones seeing
the big picture and you are blind?
The current debacle in Iraq was completely predictable.
No, I am not saying that many people in Congress had the
guts to say it at the time, and for that I am ashamed of them.
As much as I don't like Dean, he was right!
When you look at track record, right now the conservatives
have nothing to crow about.
The last even vaguely liberal President presided over the
economy better than any before it. The last conservative
presided over the Iraq debacle. See? Isn't big picture
analysis useful? As long as I'm being short sighted, I could
just as well say that Bush presided over 9/11.
The issues are very much more complex than that and
ultimately both models have their place. Knee-jerk
conservatives are equally useless and destructive as
knee-jerk liberals.
We see just fine, thank you very much.
2006-08-09 08:00:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by Elana 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Exactly the same question occurs to me regarding conservatives. Don't they see any danger in taking away restrictions on the power of Big Government to hold people without trial, without bail, and to torture them? Don't they see a problem with owing a trillion dollars to Communist China? Don't they see a problem with goading 1.5 billion Muslims who did not hate US into hating US? Don't they see a problem with closing down schools and public health facilities just so billionaires can get tax cuts? Really, I think liberals have the interconnectedness of the economy figured out far better than conservatives, that is why the reforms of the New Deal worked successfully for 70 years.
2006-08-09 07:59:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by jxt299 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Liberals view life as if they are looking in a mirror, all they see is themselves and how they appear. They cannot look beyond themselves to see the big picture. As far as helping the poor that hasn't happened as yet. They would not let Condi Rice's father join their party, that is why he joined the Republican party. You are right on the mark..
2006-08-09 08:02:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by roeskats 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Can you back that up with specific examples? I seriously think that anyone in politics does this, not just 'liberals'
2006-08-09 07:58:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by silverdragonn 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Liberal and democratic aren't synonomous. I lean more towards the Green party. I feel that there are better ways of solving problems than with war. I do agree that in some cases, war is unfortunately necessary, but I don't think that, in cases where it isn't, leaders should hide behind curtains of national security in order to conceil their true purpose of invading for the gain of their country. If all the countries would just accept the fact that different countries have different resources and assets, and work together in order to make sure that we all can benefit from each other's resources in a cooperative manner. The way things are now, it's like stealing from your neighbor instead of just asking him for the ten bucks. Cooperation is the key, and without it, you end up in a world such as the one in which we're living today.
2006-08-09 08:08:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
We do. We want a sustainable planet for the generations who would study us as an ancient, primitive culture. The neocons are those who can't see beyond Halliburton profits and a myth of world military conquest at the expense of the rest of us. Down with Dictator Dumbya!!!
2006-08-09 08:02:40
·
answer #11
·
answered by rhino9joe 5
·
0⤊
0⤋