Leftists

[GhostWriter16]

2: The fact that Mr. Beck thinks Obama is trying to create an Oligarchy is the problem. He must be joking, but the part about a "secret code" is insane.

3:What did Obama do/will do that compares him to Adolf Hitler?

1: yeah, I did not personally hear this one, but it's kinda rude anyway.

2. Obama wants to have power. He already has a Democratic Oligarchy (A term I coined) where the people pretty much elect their representatives, who then do whatever they want without care for morals, those who elected them, or the constitution.

3. Well, that's difficult to explain, but the thing about embryonic stem-cell research was a good point.

Also, the way he just talked and people listened, because they didn't like the leadership they had.

Obama will never go so far as Hiter though. Both I and Beck acknowledge this.

1. I admit it sounds very rude, and I admit if someone I respected less said that I would think they were an idiot. I respect just about everything I've heard Glenn Beck say though, so I would need proof to confirm exactly his context before judging him for it.

 

[Skwink]

2. Obama wants to have power. He already has a Democratic Oligarchy (A term I coined) where the people pretty much elect their representatives, who then do whatever they want without care for morals, those who elected them, or the constitution.

3. Well, that's difficult to explain, but the thing about embryonic stem-cell research was a good point.

Also, the way he just talked and people listened, because they didn't like the leadership they had.

Obama will never go so far as Hiter though. Both I and Beck acknowledge this.

1. I admit it sounds very rude, and I admit if someone I respected less said that I would think they were an idiot. I respect just about everything I've heard Glenn Beck say though, so I would need proof to confirm exactly his context before judging him for it.

Alright, we aren't that far away from each other. BTW this is a pretty entertaining topic though. Really good talk going on.

 

[Tee Kay]

2. Obama wants to have power. He already has a Democratic Oligarchy (A term I coined) where the people pretty much elect their representatives, who then do whatever they want without care for morals, those who elected them, or the constitution.

How is this different from when the Republicans were in power?.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I've seen just enough of Glenn Beck to realise he is an attention seeking troll who should be ignored.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Alright, we aren't that far away from each other. BTW this is a pretty entertaining topic though. Really good talk going on.

Yep. FINALLY Found a conservative (Actually there are a few others, but not many.)

I've seen just enough of Glenn Beck to realise he is an attention seeking troll who should be ignored.

Calling Glenn Beck a troll is trolling yourself. I call Obama an attention seeking troll.

Moderator Action: Actually, no it isn't, but you calling ParadigmShifter a troll - is trolling. Warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Behind The Mask]

Calling Glenn Beck a troll is trolling yourself. I call Obama an attention seeking troll.

You attempt to point out the hypocrisy of another but then entirely void your own point by commiting it yourself just making your statement void and, slightly, idiotic?

Are you even trying anymore, I can only point out your faults for so long before the nice people at the hospital put the straightjacket back on, as Im crazy from dealing with similiar persons.

 

[nonconformist]

I hardly think the president needs to seek attention...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Calling Glenn Beck a troll would be trolling if he was a member of this forum, instead of being just a troll.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Pinkos! Airy-fairy disney princesses, the whole lot of them. Where are the stern-looking unsentimental people with rifles and a you-can't-make-an-omelette-without-breaking-eggs mentality? Only Cheezy sometimes comes close of all those who've posted in that thread...

 

[GhostWriter16]

Calling Glenn Beck a troll would be trolling if he was a member of this forum, instead of being just a troll.

I would love it if Glenn Beck joined this forum, he'd be far better at refuting your arguments than I am.

 

[Behind The Mask]

I would love it if Glenn Beck joined this forum, he'd be far better at refuting your arguments than I am.

Actually I think his arguements would be basically the same as yours.

Ya know, mainly bullsh*t.

Moderator Action: Let's discuss the issues, instead of attacking other posters.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[ComradeDavo]

Really, this isn't a thread trying to deny anyone the right to be liberal, insulting anyone for being liberal, exc.

However, I find it odd, that while in the US liberals/conservatives are evenly split pretty much, on this forum most people (And even most Americans) are pro-big government, pro-large welfare state, pro-many government programs, anti-Iraq war, anti-Israel, exc. (Could name more, but you get the picture.)

I understand more posters than not differ on a couple of these points, but overall, posters fit the mold of above. Why?

Please don't take this thread to somewhere it isn't supposed to go. This is not the place to debate whether liberals or conservatives are "Better" or anything like that, just to find out why there are so much more of a percentage of liberals here than in the real world.

Also, by conservative here, I don't mean conservative to the extent I am. I'm talking about even moderate conservatives, or even moderates, like those who waver between the GOP and dems. Why are so many posters, including Americans, liberal?

Simple answer for this forum, that some people have picked up on and posted in this thread: Europe is more left-wing than America. This forum has alot of European posters. There's your answer.

The question you should really ask is: why is the USA more right-wing than the rest of the western world?

And that debate would probably belong in the history forum rather than ot.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Actually I think his arguements would be basically the same as yours.

Ya know, mainly [expletive deleted].

If Glenn Beck were a member here, you would all look stupid. Luckily for you, he's not and you're left with less than the best explanations of good politics.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Does Glenn Beck ever debate people? All I have seen is him spouting nonsense on his own while appearing to be a genuine idiot.

 

[bathsheba666]

If Glenn Beck were a member here, you would all look stupid.

Another empty assertion based on no evidence whatsoever.

Luckily for you, he's not

That can't be luck, so it must be God's will...

and you're left with less than the best explanations of good politics.

Hard to argue with this if, by "good" politics, you mean yours.....

Well, he's not here, therefore it can't be us looking stupid. QED.

 

[Behind The Mask]

If Glenn Beck were a member here, you would all look stupid. Luckily for you, he's not and you're left with less than the best explanations of good politics.

If he was on this forum he would gangraped by people who had valid points and *gasp* the cognitive ability to form reasonable thoughts in a manner that does not make them look like idiots.

But for the sake of your delusion...

De-der De-der Doo De-der De-der Doo! Oh, it seems Ive put my pants on backwards, ah what a fool I am! Oh the shame!

 

[History_Buff]

If Glenn Beck were a member here, you would all look stupid. Luckily for you, he's not and you're left with less than the best explanations of good politics.

You're right, we would all look stupid for associating ourselves with someone as willfully ignorant as Mr. Beck.

Of course, Beck doesn't debate. He doesn't argue. He just picks an opinion, and rambles about it until he breaks down and cries.

 

[Princeps]

1. Taxing people who choose not to get universal health care.

2. Forcing people to get health insurance.

3. Forcing people to pay for the well being of someone else.

Compulsion isn't corruption. I also fail to see how this is wrong or bad policy.

1. Well you can't argue this point, because you're a conservative and of course you support an insanely bloated military and national security apparatus. National security is also a service, provided by the government and funded by taxes. Therefore, if you'd apply your logic to its apparent logical end, people should be allowed to choose not to fund the military and instead provide for their own security. But you don't argue this, because you're selective in your use of this logic. But, your argument doesn't work for either healthcare or the military.

2. Mandating people to purchase a certain product isn't unprecedented nor is it a bad policy. Whether its "moral" or not is an irrelevant question. In case like healthcare insurance, when we're all most certainly going to need it at some point in our lives, it is convenient and affordable to compel the population to participate in a (preferably) collective insurance program. This way, no one is a free rider, no one is left without insurance and every one contributes. This mandate works for an insurance service, although it might not work for goods like potatoes, obviously.

3. Again, this isn't corruption. If mandating participation in a health insurance program cuts costs and helps to provide coverage for all, I don't see why this is bad. No one has an inherent right to their money or turf, rather it is a political right, derived from the same democratically determined law that mandates health insurance. Policies should be implemented with regard to the well being of the nation as a whole, and the petty

 

[GhostWriter16]

3. Policies should be implemented with regard to the well being of the nation as a whole, and the petty

This is stupid. If you earn money, its yours.

 

[Princeps]

This is stupid. If you earn money, its yours.

Ah sry, I posted too early.

What I meant to say was that the petty objections of those who insist that their ownership of something is natural or pre-political, should be ignored. All property and ownership is legally determined, and therefore can be regulated or taxed through the same law that enforces the property law in the first place. You don't own something because you think you do. Rather you own something, be it money or land, if the community (or dominant power) recognizes that you do (thats not debatable, its the reality).