Understanding Leftist Mentality

[Laerod]

They're both center right ideologies. The overlap between the two is staggering.

If that's so then they just hate each other for the sake of hating.

They don't. There's an anomaly in the US, but that mainly has to do with the Republicans being an extremist exaggeration of a conservative party and the Democrats covering pretty much everthing from conservatives to social democrats on the political spectrum.

[Laerod]

*shrugs*

You asked a question and we asked clarification.

Maybe you need a better question.

And that, my friends, is why it is impossible to engage liberals in intelligent debate. One asks them a valid question, and they evade it by going off into a completely different direction. If one keeps pressing it, eventually they will claim that the question is inadequate.

It wasn't a valid question. Why should we bother debating a hypothetical problem if you can't demonstrate that it's a real problem?

Needless to say, you didn't answer any of our questions either. But I guess it's only wrong not to when it's your questions not being answered, right?

[Socialdemokraterne]

They don't. There's an anomaly in the US, but that mainly has to do with the Republicans being an extremist exaggeration of a conservative party and the Democrats covering pretty much everthing from conservatives to social democrats on the political spectrum.

Have to admit, I'm not feeling the love from the Democrats lately. The PPACA wasn't even close to what I was shooting at, and the expansion of educational access was pretty underwhelming. I've taken the attitude that these are baby-steps and that the Democrats will eventually adopt more legitimately social democratic approaches, but I'm still kind of frustrated. Mostly it's impatience, I suppose.

[Galloism]

Without reading the thread, have we proven that Leftists are a hive-mind yet?

[Laerod]

They don't. There's an anomaly in the US, but that mainly has to do with the Republicans being an extremist exaggeration of a conservative party and the Democrats covering pretty much everthing from conservatives to social democrats on the political spectrum.

Have to admit, I'm not feeling the love from the Democrats lately. The PPACA wasn't even close to what I was shooting at, and the expansion of educational access was pretty underwhelming. I've taken the attitude that these are baby-steps and that the Democrats will eventually adopt more legitimately social democratic approaches, but I'm still kind of frustrated. Mostly it's impatience, I suppose.

It's included, it's not the majority or even a plurality.

[Nidaria]

And that, my friends, is why it is impossible to engage liberals in intelligent debate. One asks them a valid question, and they evade it by going off into a completely different direction. If one keeps pressing it, eventually they will claim that the question is inadequate.

Oh the irony.


-edit hmmm something happened to my post-

Alright for the fun of it; let's answer your question with a no.

Let's see where you are going with it.

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice.

[Laerod]

Oh the irony.


-edit hmmm something happened to my post-

Alright for the fun of it; let's answer your question with a no.

Let's see where you are going with it.

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice. :)

This is why we ask you to clarify. You have no support for this and given your facetious "debating" none will ever materialize.

[San-Silvacian]

Oh no! You've uncovered our secret ambition to control the world and twirl our moustaches evilly! Quick, left-wing hivemind, to the underground lair, before the God-fearing, honest conservative American patriots righteously strike us down and institute an apple pie-and-baseball-scented utopia!

Sigged so hard.

[Socialdemokraterne]

It's included, it's not the majority or even a plurality.

Why did you have to go and remind me how small my portion of the Democratic Party really is? T__T

[Socialdemokraterne]

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice.

Now comes the hard part: how are you going to do that? How are you going to distinguish the leech from the legitimate?

[Wirbel]

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice.

This is why we ask you to clarify. You have no support for this and given your facetious "debating" none will ever materialize.

We all know there are millions of people doing this in the United States. Some of them aren't even legitimately poor.

[Laerod]

It's included, it's not the majority or even a plurality.

Why did you have to go and remind me how small my portion of the Democratic Party really is? T__T

Misery loves company.

[Rick Rollin]

And then sack Rome. Leave Vatican City alone, of course.

But Rome itself is okay.

Build a giant shield over the Vatican and maybe the Coliseum. Burn the rest of that shit.

Actually, I'm talking out of my ass, I have never even been to Italy. The closest was Switzerland. lol, but if he will sack Rome, have fun with that! And yest, leave the Vatican alone. They are not even part of Italy!

SODOMIZE ALL!

Let's just say that conservatives will never fully understand liberals and liberals will never fully understand conservatives, okay?

They're both center right ideologies. The overlap between the two is staggering.

No Europeans please. The stupid OP was probably from America.

Ok. So you have a question without any numbers in an effort to discredit a system you don't like?

Or are you simply seeking to apply some character flaw to the both of us?

So how do you measure "not wanting to work" and how would you keep track of it?

If you do not directly answer my question the way I meant it, you will be proving that liberals cannot answer a question intelligently.

Please don't move the goal posts. If only I was a mod...

*shrugs*

You asked a question and we asked clarification.

Maybe you need a better question.

And that, my friends, is why it is impossible to engage liberals in intelligent debate. One asks them a valid question, and they evade it by going off into a completely different direction. If one keeps pressing it, eventually they will claim that the question is inadequate.

Shitty defense. Are you flame-baiting or what? /mod

Keep pushing the 'Liberal Agenda', my left-aligned friends! Soon, soon, we shall dominate the entire world with rationalism, idealism, human rights, democracy and a whole box-load of evil and antagonizing ideals and beliefs.

...

Oh, wait.

And this is why 'liberals' are as blindly partisan and sloganeering as the worst megachurch freak. Democracy? Would have resulted in the Muslim Brotherhood many times in Egypt.

And what's so bad about them?

Human rights? Ahahahaha what does that have to do with rationalism or anything really except "because I say so" superstition.

There are many reasons for a bill of rights besides morality.

Idealism? Invented by Plato, who was hardly a liberal in any meaningful sense of the word.

Black Metal? Invented by Quarthon, who was hardly from Norway in any meaningful sense of the word.

I've noticed that those who trumpet their rationality and reason the most very rarely are the most reasonable or rational of people… half of leftist psychology seems to be an attachment to novelty-seeking for its own sake and a refusal to understand the purposes of conventions and traditions in lieu of belittling or sweeping them aside.

Big words mean little.

legit question

Why do liberal hate macho-ism?

Balls should back the brain, not the other way around.

If that's so then they just hate each other for the sake of hating.

They don't. There's an anomaly in the US, but that mainly has to do with the Republicans being an extremist exaggeration of a conservative party and the Democrats covering pretty much everthing from conservatives to social democrats on the political spectrum.

Republicans: Maistre conservative/classical liberal/fascist?
Democrats: social democrat/Toryism/social liberal?

Both are pretty spread out on the political spectrum.

Without reading the thread, have we proven that Leftists are a hive-mind yet?

We should have continued with the Vietnam War until we won. So no.

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice.

This is why we ask you to clarify. You have no support for this and given your facetious "debating" none will ever materialize.

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice.

Now comes the hard part: how are you going to do that? How are you going to distinguish the leech from the legitimate?

All poor people are just lazy. This is a fact and any pinko liberul who asks for a source hates America. As an honest reasonhating conservative said:

This is why we ask you to clarify. You have no support for this and given your facetious "debating" none will ever materialize.

We all know there are millions of people doing this in the United States. Some of them aren't even legitimately poor.

And no proof is required. None at all!

[Socialdemokraterne]

We all know there are millions of people doing this in the United States. Some of them aren't even legitimately poor.

We need sources, Wirbel. Evidence of widespread welfare abuse in the United States? "We all know it's happening" isn't sufficient.

[Laerod]

This is why we ask you to clarify. You have no support for this and given your facetious "debating" none will ever materialize.

We all know there are millions of people doing this in the United States. Some of them aren't even legitimately poor.

Prove it. I'm not taking fantasy as evidence. Back it up with something real.

[Nidaria]

In that case, millions of people who would be unnecessarily be leaching off the taxpayer's money would be forced to find a job and contribute to society instead. You made the right choice.

Now comes the hard part: how are you going to do that? How are you going to distinguish the leech from the legitimate?

Those who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five (not a minor or a senior) and are not sufferng from a debilitating illness or injury should not be entitled to receive welfare.

[Khadgar]

Now comes the hard part: how are you going to do that? How are you going to distinguish the leech from the legitimate?

Those who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five (not a minor or a senior) and are not sufferng from a debilitating illness or injury should not be entitled to receive welfare.

Agreed, now, you said millions. Do source that.

[Wikkiwallana]

legit question

Why do liberal hate macho-ism?

Depends on what constitutes machoism.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Now comes the hard part: how are you going to do that? How are you going to distinguish the leech from the legitimate?

Those who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five (not a minor or a senior) and are not sufferng from a debilitating illness or injury should not be entitled to receive welfare.

What if they are impoverished and can't find a job no matter how hard they try? What if they are homeless and can only find work at (I was going to say McDonalds, but my teacher told us that it actually looks good on a resumé) a movie theatre concession stand?

[Wikkiwallana]

Without reading the thread, have we proven that Leftists are a hive-mind yet?

Depends, are you asking the Leftists or the Rightists?
Because the former will say no, while I'm guessing the latter would say it's been done about twice a page.

[Laerod]

Now comes the hard part: how are you going to do that? How are you going to distinguish the leech from the legitimate?

Those who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five (not a minor or a senior) and are not sufferng from a debilitating illness or injury should not be entitled to receive welfare.

Ridiculous. As though the only reason someone capable of working not having a job would be that they don't want to.

[Galloism]

Without reading the thread, have we proven that Leftists are a hive-mind yet?

Depends, are you asking the Leftists or the Rightists?
Because the former will say no, while I'm guessing the latter would say it's been done about twice a page.

Well, I already know what the leftists think, because we're a hivemind.

DOH!

[Laerod]

Those who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five (not a minor or a senior) and are not sufferng from a debilitating illness or injury should not be entitled to receive welfare.

Agreed, now, you said millions. Do source that.

What? Why? What if there's no jobs available? Under the above you'd get cut from welfare for reasons out of your control.

[Socialdemokraterne]

Those who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five (not a minor or a senior) and are not sufferng from a debilitating illness or injury should not be entitled to receive welfare.

That's...one way to do it. Unfortunately you've constructed a system that entirely fails to account for the fact that not everyone between the ages of 18 and 65 living on tightly fixed (or entirely absent) incomes and reliant on services such as food and rent assistance is a welfare cheat. Are you proposing that young people who can't make ends meet invariably deserve no assistance?

It seems to me you're using a sledgehammer when you need to use a fine point. While your suggestion is certainly an option, it's not what I would do. What I would do is provide food, rent assistance, and so on while demanding some sort of community service in return to offset the costs. If those people you're trying to get rid of are truly as lazy as you say, they'll be driven into "real jobs" because welfare has work associated with it. I could fine-tune my suggestion, but that's the general principle: working for welfare.

[Norstal]

Depends, are you asking the Leftists or the Rightists?
Because the former will say no, while I'm guessing the latter would say it's been done about twice a page.

Well, I already know what the leftists think, because we're a hivemind.

DOH!

That's not true...that's not true at all...GET OUT OF MY HEADDD!