English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

What is the biggest danger from the New Left and their puppets in the demoncrat party?

Wanton disregard for human life?
Mandated Orwellian speech which makes meaningful intercourse impossible?
Suppression of Freedom of Relegion?
A middle class burdened by over taxation?
Largest propaganda machine known to man? (Hollywood)
Weakend national defense?

Any thoughts?

2007-01-13 00:41:43 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Just so nobody gets confused… you may see certain terms in my question. If you don’t know what neolibralism is, please look it up before responding and understand I am a true liberal. I spelled ‘demoNcrat’ on purpose. You may have heard the terms ‘sexual intercourse’ or ‘male chauvinism’, these terms are not redundant. Therefore, chauvinism and intercourse have very distinct meanings beyond their colloquial use.

2007-01-13 00:41:55 · update #1

Sir Daddy probably the smartest thing you have said all day

KP If you are going to resort to personal insults, can you come up with something a little more clever?

Progurt, be careful throwing the name of the Lord around.

Slug the old aristocracy has masked itself in the democrat party, the same party that owned chattel slaves. This neolibralism is just the Western version of Stalinism. A little more subtle, but no less dangerous.

2007-01-13 00:58:02 · update #2

Stone K you are right. It is hard not to sink to their level. I am not a republican, but I usually vote that way because of my disgust of the democrat blind support of abortion. I still wish the republicans would get in the muck and fight just as dirty as the democrats do during an election.

2007-01-13 01:00:27 · update #3

mudmarine no doubt!

Deuce right you are. God help us if his wife gets in...

2007-01-13 01:01:48 · update #4

Ben, be careful, I believe in a command economy. the only way a libertarian and I could get along is if we live in my ideal government, anarcho communism.

2007-01-13 01:22:29 · update #5

9 answers

I vote for all of the above.

However the one I find most frustrating is the second choice.

But i think it goes beyond just being able to have a reasonable discussion, it goes to the point, that if you disagree it is because you are "Racist", "sexist", "Homophobic" or a "War monger"

Then the conversation degrades to name calling and defending yourself from accusations.

I know that's slightly off topic, but i thought it worth mentioning.

Add on: Actually reading some of the responses, I would say my observation was correct.

2007-01-13 00:57:26 · answer #1 · answered by Stone K 6 · 2 2

Disregard for human life and a weak national defense are the biggest dangers. We found out on 9-11 what eight years of a do nothing, so called "leader" caused. It's a scary thought what could happen with these democrats running things again

2007-01-13 08:59:58 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 3 0

A neo-lib in the historical sense has always stood for free markets, limited government and the protection of personal liberties. "A middle class burdened by overtaxation" suggest a mindset that is in tune with the current liberal class warfare thinking. A single rate tax system offers a fair standard to all. Moreover, this country more than any other has tried to exist as a classless and cultureless society in spite of many who view it otherwise.

2007-01-13 08:52:12 · answer #3 · answered by Slug 3 · 1 3

So your a lib that hates political correctness?

and that is a true liberal?

Wow, i have to say, i have rarely seen libs like you these days. I like your kind of liberal meaning because it just might be logical

2007-01-13 09:11:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

FrontPage Magazine: You make the shrewd observation of how political correctness engenders evil because of “the violence that it does to people’s souls by forcing them to say or imply what they do not believe, but must not question.” Can you talk about this a bit?

Theodore Dalrymple: Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/06/political-correctness-revenge-of.html

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles/FonteCultureWar.shtml

2007-01-13 08:47:40 · answer #5 · answered by Socinian F 3 · 2 3

The hardcore entrenched bigotry of the Right and Neocons always tries to stifle the progressive, innovative solutions of the Left, Liberals and Democrats with name calling and transparent brinksmanship. God willing, the people will realize where their bread is buttered and won't fall for Bushenanigans ever again.

2007-01-13 08:49:58 · answer #6 · answered by Plaxico Domingo 3 · 1 4

Their HATE may spread.
Lots of weak, impressionable minds out there.

2007-01-13 08:49:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

probably just exposing the ignorance and downright stupidity of brainless sheep like you, "chuckles"

now that's a danger you have every right to fear.

how'd ya come up with the nickname? chuckling like a nekked schoolboy while getting bent over by dubya and his nazi administration? bet it felt good to ya, huh???

tool.

2007-01-13 08:49:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

yo mama, sucka

2007-01-13 08:44:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers