On the Intellectual Inferiority of Liberalism

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bro. Curtis, Jan 23, 2012.

  1. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    ....
    Most "liberals" today do not believe in freedom, but support tyranny. That inversion of history has been accomplished by mass propaganda. If you doubt that, just ask your nearest friendly liberal what they think about "fundamentalist Christians." It's a hot button that will set of a flood of rage, all due to the leftwing media propaganda. Just try it on your family and friends. It shocks me every time I see it, because it has absolutely no basis in reality. Liberal hatred of believing Christians comes to you courtesy of the mass fantasy machine. (American Abolitionism, which led to the Civil War, was a created by believing Christians. Just listen to the words of the Battle Hymn of the Republic.)


    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/on_the_intellectual_inferiority_of_liberalism.html
     
  2. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    157


    It is you that is taking the liberal position that corporations are individuals and have the same constitutional rights as individual people. I find that very liberal and very dangerous as it takes away the freedoms of individuals. Individual people do not have the money to defend their freedoms whereas corporations can throw millions at issues and influence congressmen to protect them at the expense of individuals.

    I will defend your right to speak your philosophy. Will you defend my right to do the same?


    Nothing near the rage you exhibit where people do not agree with you. I feel no rage against fundamentalists as long as they maintain a Christ-like attitude toward those who do not totally agree with them. In fact, for those who have poor attitudes I feel no rage, only sorrow at their un-Christ-like attitude.

    So all liberals are not Christian and are lost. Is this what you are saying?

    Are you defending slavery? I have met people who do. I really hope you are not one of them.
     
    #2 Crabtownboy, Jan 23, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2012
  3. seekingthetruth

    seekingthetruth
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,611
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's see.

    If it weren't for AT&T you would not have a telephone.

    If it were not for Exxon, Texaco, and for sure Standard Oil, then you could not drive your car.

    If it weren't for Microsoft, then you couldn't post your silly thoughts.

    If it werent for your local greedy power company then you wouldnt have lights.

    If it werent for Chase Citibank and BoA, (dba, the FED) you wouldnt own a house.

    If it werent for the USA and our proud military, you would probably be speaking Russian, Chinese or Arabic......if you were even still alive.

    Nawwww...i think you got it pretty good the way it is, and should thank God that you live in a country that has so many corporations to supply your needs, and a military to protect your right to be ungrateful.

    John

    PS. Do you really begrudge large companies for having the money to lobby, or are you really just jealous of them?
     
  4. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    157
    True. Sometimes I really like the phone and there are times I do not like it.

    True.

    Sure I could. Steve Jobs would have made it possible. Actually it was DARPA that made posting messages possible.

    True.

    My mortgage was not through those huge banks. Remember it was BoA and other huge banks that got us into so much economic trouble. But I am glad there are banks, especially small local ones. They are much more uses friendly than the big banks.

    No, we would still be speaking the King's ... or is it Queen's English.

    I am not arguing that. I am arguing they are not afforded the same constitutional rights as you and I.


    Begrudge companies, not at all. I simply do not believe they are individuals as you and I are individuals and are not afforded the same consititutional freedoms that you and I are given.
     
  5. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    The left does not believe in freedom. If they do not like something they want to use the force of the government to make them do it their way.
     
  6. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0


    I am honestly trying to figure out what that has to do with tyranny?

    Again what does that have to do with what you quoted?


    What?:confused:
     
  7. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    The arrogance of the quote in the OP misstates the nature of intellectual engagement from either side. It is a quasi-intellectual attempt at belittling the (perceived) competition by asserting something that is simply not true. There are rigorous intellectuals on both sides of the issues and the middle as well. In my days I've met just as many idiotic conversatives as I have idiotic liberals. One's political affliation is not a simple discussion of intellectual capacity.
     
  8. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    The so-called liberals/progressives of this day are really reactionaries. They support the return of the tyranny of a super state, dictator, emperor, king, whatever one may choose to call him/it. But they want a benevolent dictator, one who will nurse them through life! And perhaps eliminate those pesky Christians!
     
  9. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Old Regular, I've never heard it explained better.
     
  10. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    The liberals took this country over in the 2006 mid-terms, (thanx to a very weak republican). If they say the country is better off now, than it was before, then I have no problem calling myself their intellectual superior.
     
  11. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Wow, talk about an example of a bad argument.

    Times are hard
    Things haven't gotten better
    You're in charge
    You're obvious an idiot

    Really? I mean if you're going to talk about whether they are intellectual inferior talk about their double standards of life (while acknowledging your own) or talk about how they have forgotten the founders' intent in the Constitution. Maybe talk about the foundations of liberalism not being in the self but in the betterment of the those who can't fight for themselves. Talk about the difficulty in coontrolling markets versus letting them have a greater freedom. Talk about how taxation is a measure of freedom, or about how we are considered equal until it comes to income. Goodness gracious talk about how they view mandating change as opposed to leading change. Talk about how they view society with suspcion as opposed to letting people be free.

    Talk about the REAL issues and not some haphazard, vapid argumentation that does nothing by showcase your own intellectual incredulity. Talk about the issues that matter and why they are wrong. Don't belittle your own conversation and post by putting together some inane banter that doesn't amount to a hill of beans for fruitful argumentation.

    Otherwise, you've just proven that you can't handle an actual conversation about the intellectual capacity and are, inevitably, just another clanging gong shutting down actual conversation.
     
  12. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    You either are not reading my post correctly, or I wasn't clear.

    If you say I am better off now, than before 2006, yes, you are either dishonest, uninformed, or dumb.

    If you say the country is better off now than before 2006, the same rules apply.
     
    #12 Bro. Curtis, Jan 24, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2012
  13. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    This post indicates you did not actually read the op as a whole.
     
  14. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    I have to correct this....it should be

    Either you are not reading my post correctly, or I am not being clear.


    Can you start a sentence with "either" ?
     

Share This Page

Loading...