Extreme Liberals are Just as Fascist as Extreme Right-Wingers

[Parker2112]

fwiw, libertarianism is much wider in thought than you obviously limit yourself to.. you are no better than the "idealists" you hate when you simply parrot the party line any time someone challenges you, as you have in this thread.



On that disparity, further (bolding/underlining mine):



I have no reason to state my beliefs, in any case.. you can say "you thought so" all night, as I have don't have any reason to think you are doing anything except looking for someone base enough to be a sparring partner.

Your case is an intersting one to me, zosa, because you obviously dont support the two parties in power, and you want to latch on to something outside the mainstream political majority to reflect your beliefs, and yet you unwittingly denounce much of the Libertarian party platform (which you subscribe to?) as being "conspiracy" based. Do you understand the implications here?

They are this: The mainstream media and the two parties still control your perspective, to the point that you dont even know the substance of Libertarianism, and you are brainwashed to denounce views outside of the majority, including your own party () as conspiracy fodder.

This is manipulation of the masses to a tee.

And its amazing to see first hand, honestly.

Have fun trying to find Libertarianism through the views of MSM, Dems, and Repubs that you have been endoctrinated into. Its going to be a bumpy ride. Or more likely, you never will.

Or better yet, stick to the places your most comfortable: the majority views that will tend to align your position with half of the electorate on any given issue. This will provide shelter for you, and will keep you from standing out in a crowd (which seems to be important to you).

It will keep you in the pasture with the flock, safe from ridicule and heckling, and you will find your direction at the shephard's staff and the dog's nip. This may be the place for you...cuz everybody aint meant to wander the countryside unsupervised.

Best of luck to you.
~Parker2112

[Parker2112]

Then it should be easy to define.

Please define "progressive ideals". I have asked twice already, and zoSa once. This makes it the fourth time.

You seem to disagree with them.

I already did. Looks like you cant ing read either. Eat a .

[Cry Havoc]

Still trying to discover why Parker2112 made this thread, other than to about how partisan our country has become. Which is hilarious and obvious simultaneously, given that Jon Stewart had a 3 hour rally about it on Saturday and about 300,000 people showed up in support of that viewpoint.

[Yonivore]

Still trying to discover why Parker2112 made this thread, other than to about how partisan our country has become. Which is hilarious, given that Jon Stewart had a 3 hour rally about it on Saturday.

I thought that wasn't political.

[Parker2112]

Still trying to discover why Parker2112 made this thread, other than to about how partisan our country has become. Which is hilarious and obvious simultaneously, given that Jon Stewart had a 3 hour rally about it on Saturday and about 300,000 people showed up in support of that viewpoint.

Even if that was the only reason, whats your point? It was evidently enough to bring you here, and keep you here?

[Cry Havoc]

I thought that wasn't political.

It wasn't. It was decidedly anti-political. It was a collection of people who think that both parties are two heads to the same monster, and an observation of how ridiculous it all is. It obviously had a lot to do with politics, but it wasn't political in the sense that, "We are affiliated with this party/movement/etc. and we want to be heard." There was no direction, no definitive rallying cry to support "X" candidate, or "Y" party or system. It was simply a day of fun and humor, and chuckling at the entire process. The closest it came to being political was the simple statement that our media has become too politically biased and lacks any real objectivity anymore.

Even if that was the only reason, whats your point? It was evidently enough to bring you here, and keep you here?

Yes, because I'm wondering if at some point you'll actually assert yourself and make a statement that's not patently obvious. If you keep bumping this thread to the top with responses, I figure you must have a point unless you're trolling, which is becoming more of a possibility with ever generalized, "We need to change the system" 1960s era statement you make.

It's not that I disagree with you. It's that you're spending a lot of energy to say a lot of words, and I'm waiting for a hint of originality in them. I click on the thread hoping I won't be disappointed, but so far, it's pretty much the same thing for 3 pages.

[boutons_deux]

False equivelance

There's nothing in the center or left that even remotely compares with the organized, bad-faith extremism of the right wing.

[Cry Havoc]

False equivelance

There's nothing in the center or left that even remotely compares with the organized, bad-faith extremism of the right wing.

I disagree. The far left is just as bad, they just aren't as loud as the far right for the time being.

[z0sa]

Your case is an intersting one to me, zosa, because you obviously dont support the two parties in power, and you want to latch on to something outside the mainstream political majority to reflect your beliefs, and yet you unwittingly denounce much of the Libertarian party platform (which you subscribe to?) as being "conspiracy" based. Do you understand the implications here?

They are this: The mainstream media and the two parties still control your perspective, to the point that you dont even know the substance of Libertarianism, and you are brainwashed to denounce views outside of the majority, including your own party () as conspiracy fodder.

This is manipulation of the masses to a tee.

And its amazing to see first hand, honestly.

Have fun trying to find Libertarianism through the views of MSM, Dems, and Repubs that you have been endoctrinated into. Its going to be a bumpy ride. Or more likely, you never will.

Or better yet, stick to the places your most comfortable: the majority views that will tend to align your position with half of the electorate on any given issue. This will provide shelter for you, and will keep you from standing out in a crowd (which seems to be important to you).

It will keep you in the pasture with the flock, safe from ridicule and heckling, and you will find your direction at the shephard's staff and the dog's nip. This may be the place for you...cuz everybody aint meant to wander the countryside unsupervised.

Best of luck to you.
~Parker2112

I've been rather vague in my views to this point. That hasn't stopped you from branding me based on multiple faulty presumptions, parroting the modern libertarian party line, and overall, being a jackass.

Here's what I have to say in response: I don't technically align myself with ANY party. There's a humongous reason why I said, ".. but you consider yourself libertarian, and you don't live in reality.." I knew this BS was coming. You are a sheeple just like everyone else, parroting "your views", which Ron Paul told you.

I especially enjoy how you believe one must submit to these off the wall conspiracy theories and pointless observations of fascism ("..and you are brainwashed to denounce views outside of the majority, including your own party () as conspiracy fodder.") in order to be a libertarian.

I mean, wow.

Best of luck finding someone base enough for such an argument.

[Winehole23]

Best of luck finding someone base enough for such an argument.

Plenty more where that one came from. It only takes one person to beat off.

[Wild Cobra]

I disagree. The far left is just as bad, they just aren't as loud as the far right for the time being.

Not only that, but it isn't news anymore when they do dumb things, like the guy who stepped on the MoveOn worker. has the parties been reversed, it wouldn't have been news.

[Cry Havoc]

Not only that, but it isn't news anymore when they do dumb things, like the guy who stepped on the MoveOn worker. has the parties been reversed, it wouldn't have been news.

You're delusional. A woman having her head stepped on at a political rally is going to make waves regardless of her political affiliation.

Do you really mean to suggest that it was on the news because she's liberal, rather than, you know, being a woman who's being abused by men for no reason?

[Wild Cobra]

You're delusional. A woman having her head stepped on at a political rally is going to make waves regardless of her political affiliation.

Do you really mean to suggest that it was on the news because she's liberal, rather than, you know, being a woman who's being abused by men for no reason?

I'm saying such news wouldn't be a news item in my state if the candidate was liberal, the activist conservative, and the stomper liberal.

Actually, I'll retract that. The news would be the conservative activist charging the candidate and being a threat, having to be taken down. The head stomping would have been edited out of the news.

[Cry Havoc]

Actually, I'll retract that. The news would be the conservative activist charging the candidate and being a threat, having to be taken down.

You mean, exactly like the message Jack, Yoni, and yourself have attempted to communicate?

You basically just lambasted the "liberal media" for potentially using the same tactic that conservatives in this forum are actively employing. I find that very odd that when you guys do it, it's just being objective, but if it was coming from a liberal source, it would be intentional obfuscation.

The head stomping would have been edited out of the news.

You guys certainly seem to be doing all you can to minimizing it. When it happened and you were defending it, he was just "holding her down", but flip the situation and your conservative sign-holder would be getting goomba-ed by Mario? You could not be more transparent if you tried.

[Wild Cobra]

You guys certainly seem to be doing all you can to minimizing it. When it happened and you were defending it, he was just "holding her down", but flip the situation and your conservative sign-holder would be getting goomba-ed by Mario? You could not be more transparent if you tried.

Please show me where I agreed the stepping on was justifiable.

[Cry Havoc]

Please show me where I agreed the stepping on was justifiable.

You didn't, but you spent the entire thread justifying the behavior. It's like the captain of his team taking responsibility for a loss by saying, "Yeah, it's my fault we lost this game, but all of our players suck." You're pardoning the incident, making acceptable space for it to exist, even as you obliquely state that it's wrong. You find yourself torn between your allegiance to your partisanship and your sense of morality. So you make room for both. It's an ambiguous response to the situation, clearing your conscience even as you pander to your party.

You mean, exactly like the message Jack, Yoni, and yourself have attempted to communicate?

You basically just lambasted the "liberal media" for potentially using the same tactic that conservatives in this forum are actively employing. I find that very odd that when you guys do it, it's just being objective, but if it was coming from a liberal source, it would be intentional obfuscation.

[Cry Havoc]

double post

[Wild Cobra]

You didn't, but you spent the entire thread justifying the behavior. It's like the captain of his team taking responsibility for a loss by saying, "Yeah, it's my fault we lost this game, but all of our players suck." You're pardoning the incident, making acceptable space for it to exist, even as you obliquely state that it's wrong. You find yourself torn between your allegiance to your partisanship and your sense of morality. So you make room for both. It's an ambiguous response to the situation, clearing your conscience even as you pander to your party.

Bull .

I drew a clear line at the stepping on her shoulder, repeatedly saying there was no justification for that. All before that was.