Is this the typical Lib response to those that disagree with their viewpont ? What of diversity of opinion ?

Question

Who is the "Hitler" here ?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Arq0gRmGtvSfRUO_6Mx2zXbZ7BR.?qid=20070507201330AAf8sjc

Answer 1

Hey "shut you...", I would put you closer to Stalin, you know, forcing millions into the military and such, then later eliminatin those that threaten your power. As for the main question, from the far-lefters is where you can expect more of these questions from. Oh yeah, props to awood 80.

Answer 2

As a libertarian that did not vote Dem or Rep, I find the question interesting. Your reference to the "How should we make all of the Bush voters pay?" from "shut up" makes me wonder if she believes in free elections or, are we still stuck in the "Bush stole the election mode."
It is obvious that a majority of Americans voted for Bush, whether I agree with it or not.
Frankly, I don't think the Dems would have done any better, and they would be making up every excuse under the sun.
I was in the military during the Carter administration, and the Dems and Reps were arguing about something that threatened to hold up our paychecks for weeks. The time to argue about the war is after the troops get funded because the troops don't give a damn about Dems or Reps. They do care about supplies and pay. The politicians can debate the merits of the war afterward !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 3

Can't you even ask a question of diversity, without insulting people who don't agree with your viewpoint? I'd like to think that both liberals and conservatives are on the same page, but it's hard when all the conservatives can do is tell a liberal that they don't know what they are talking about, when in fact they do. But, conservatives don't want to listen to the truth, they want to go back in time and bring up things that were said by Democrats that were in agreement with Bush on the war in Iraq at that time. The problem is that most of the stuff they are pulling up to back up their cases was from prior to when the truth of WMD's were proved a figment of the imagination of a president who wanted to invade Iraq, before the inspectors were allowed to go into Iraq and check for the WMD's, and found they didn't exist. Everyone was in agreement that Saddam had them and was getting ready to attack the U.S. but not after being proved wrong. Unfortunately, the president was already moving our troops against Iraq having forgotten the quest to capture the man who attacked the United States in Afghanistan. So, we are upset and do not support a war in Iraq, when the main terrorist that bombed our buildings was now no longer important to Bush, that's why we went to war!! That's not why Bush went to war, and that's why we don't agree with you when you back this man up. Bin Laden is no longer important to the president, I watched him tell the press those very words, we're not worried about Bin Laden, he's no threat to us anymore. Get a clue, wake up, what is this man fighting for? Not for us.

Answer 4

A sloppy question at best, but it seems to have caused quite a bit of excitment. I love the veiled insults, quite fun to read.

Anyway, I don't believe that that is how the majority of liberals feel. That question (from the link) is probibly from a lefty nut, not the average guy on the street.

And yes we are still in Afghanistan and still hunting for Al Quaida, the media simply has a bigger fish to fry in Iraq, and ignores it. Not to mention you can't prove Bush lied about WMD's based solely on the benefit of hindsight and weapons inspection (which were suspected to be flawed by politicians in both parties).

Answer 5

Why, in your mind, are all liberals responsible for the moronic question of one of them?

No, it's not typical.

But what is much more common on this site is to see people say that all liberals or all democrats should be rounded up and imprisoned, or exiled, or tortured, or shot.

I've seen dozens of such posts, and very few such suggestions from the left.

Answer 6

Your so-called 'diversity' did not exist when 43 ordered the war in Iraq.
It was his way or the highway, and he was a bleeding liar - well proven to have been.

He is the 'hitler'(please don't capitalize that monster's name), because innocent and not so innocent people are being killed for absolutely no reason in a country that was devastated before the fool even went in there!!

He was after Saddam for trying to kill his 'dad' as he said himself. The 'war' was just a means to get him and he did, at such a cost !!! He's a cold-blooded killer, G.W., and should be arrested immediately after noon on Jan 20th/09, when Hillary takes over. 'Nuff said. Your kind annoy me to no end - mind*** boors !!

Answer 7

There are extremists on both sides

Would you like me to lump you in with some of the ultra right war mongering hate everyone self proclaimed conservatives ?

I am guessing not

Answer 8

Oh stop it. You conservatives are 10 times worse at silencing and ridiculing anyone that disagrees with you. Stop trying to take the moral high ground.

Answer 9

Not so much liberals, but many far lefters. They get it from the far leftists in Hollywood. "You're free to say whatever you want, as long as you agree with me."

Oh, and no one can send me to Iraq for supporting the President. I'm already here.

Answer 10

Just take your dose and do every body a favour!

I never bother answering your pointless Ques.'s!!! so should every one else....