Why cant Repubs answer a question without saying the words "Liberal" "Commie" "Socialist"

Question

name calling is not the best arguement do you have anything better?

"I just did" was cute the first time, but kinda dumb to copy his answer over & over again right?

BuggedInMN: You almost made it then started name calling

BuggedInMN:I was so dissapointed!! lol !!

If you have a good arguement that I disagree with I would read it its interesting, but name calling makes me not listen, maybe thats the same with you

plezurgu: Yeah Think Tanks and laws passed are now using misleading names, this administration has done a lot of that. I am as much of a Socialist as you are!

hibernia: I would listen to someone that has an opposing point of view and you can make a powerful arguement without calling lumping me into a group that I dont belong. Would you listen to someone who says you are a Repukicon in their answer? I think not!

I_Walk_on_Poor_People: sorry for blocking you but what do you expect me to do?

Answer 1

Interestingly enough these adjective are used interchangeably and mistakenly.
IMHO the very definition of liberal is a person whom keeps an open mind, and has the capacity and intelligence to know a good idea when they hear it. Forward thinkers and people of vision are at first discriminated against, then labeled "crazy", then labeled "dangerous", and finally accepted.

Communism and Socialism are wonderful concepts, how ever both have failed as governmental structures due to corruption by those in power. Neither had in place an appropriate way to keep leaders in check.

Could we come up with something similar, picking what is known to work and adding new ideas in the realm of previous failures ? Perhaps we could call it AMERICANISM...

A democracy is great in concept, the power to the people. It's shortfall lies with every day distractions, not a lack of information but an overload of information and no time to sort it all out to draw one's own conclusions. The result is an overwhelming feeling that one single person cannot make a difference, and that leads to hopelessness, which ultimately leads to not voting. In essence surrendering the very power one has in a democracy.

Think of this Democratic government of ours. It's been in use for 300+ years. Make an analogy to an engine in a car, with all that operation your most certainly going to need a tune up, and so does our government.

Answer 2

My first though was "because they don't know the difference," but it's more complicated.

Liberalism, communism and socialism are all political terms and - surprise - different political movements often have reason to redefine political terms. So are conservative and capitalist. Every one of those terms has at least two different meanings. Some of those terms have two completely opposite meanings.

For example, when supporters of the New Deal defined their position as liberalism, supporters of classical liberalism started calling their position libertarianism in response. (And supporters of libertarian socialism have had to push back against those who would define socialism as statism and libertarianism as plutocracy...)

Answer 3

The alternative would be to discuss facts, issues, and policy. But this is a problem for the right-wing noise machine, for its professional elite as well as their eager acolytes on YA. The facts aren't on their side, they have no policy ideas except the same old discredited principles which have made Bush the most failed President in history, and their positions on issues are unpopular. Since they really have nothing substantial or relevant to say, they might as well go back to calling Hillary a b***h and hoping nobody notices that's all they have.

Answer 4

Because the Karl Rove Smear Handbook for Republicans advises them in Section 2.1.1 that character assassination is the way to victory. Shhhh...They don't realize that the country is on to them since the swift boating in 2004. They won't figure that out until they're sitting open mouthed in front of their televisions on Election Day wondering what in the world happened.

Answer 5

Reading most questions from the left side, we could answer better, but then we wouldlose our accounts cause the crybabies would report us. Try actually posting something that isn't a anti-Bush rant and we are happy to answer. Your side on the other hand seems to bring up Bush if I ask about the weather.

Answer 6

Likewise, vice versa and back at ya!

I have been called neo con, repug, facist, racist and I just deal with it.

Also, there is a difference in liberals and democrats. There are some decent democrats but they are hard to find, liberalism is a form of a democrat only someone who's view points (to me) are all wrong.

When I post and I use socialist, it is how I feel about that particular person. Like Hillary, I truly believe she is a socialist that some just don't see. Now, I'm not saying all democrats are, but the ones like hillary are.

Answer 7

I am not condoning name-calling, I seldom do it. But I can sometimes see why some do. You ask a question. You get an answer. You don't like the answer. Next you respond with an edit and throw "neocon" into the mix (if it hasn't already been included in the question). Or, "warmonger". How about "idiot"? "Repuke"? Whatever. Many will strike back. What do you expect?

Answer 8

They sometimes can't think of what to say, so they figure that if they use these words, they can get some kind of response out of certain people.
It is not necessarily meant to be mean and nasty!!!

Answer 9

There is a significant difference between "name calling" and identifying someone with a label which suits their arguments or position.
Calling you a stupid SOB is name calling, calling you a Socialist is merely identifying your agenda to clear the air since few Socialists and Communists (is there a difference?) hardly ever freely admit it. Most subversive groups take high sounding names which are diametrically oppose from their goals and intentions. People for the American Way are hardly that. The People's Republic of (fill-in the blank) are NEVER.
Yes, I imagine you would love to argue your socialist agenda without anyone identifying it as such.

Answer 10

because they see the world as Republicans and others with Republicans as the only acceptable thing to be....so if you're not a Republican, you're the enemy.