While there are probably plenty of liberals with wacky ideas, there are only two anti-factual liberal policy positions that I can think of with any mainstream backing: 1) Alternative medicine 2)anti-nuclear power
Isn’t that what we used to say about refusing to raise the debt ceiling, or indiscriminate sequester cuts to the federal budget?
True. The 9-11 Truthers were mostly left-of-center, but that was not so much a policy position as an agitated mood.
In fairness, the sequester was a bipartisan fuckup.
It was only a bipartisan fuckup in the sense that the Dems badly misjudged the extent of the Reps’ batshittedness. Other than that, the debt ceiling fiasco and everything that resulted from it, including the recovery-impeding sequester and the recovery-impeding lowering of the government’s credit rating, is *entirely *on the Reps.
His name is Lee John.
Not quite, as it has been for several years, and taking into account that it is very rare to get super majorities nowadays, Republicans are also part of the problem in this areas, as I noticed before, while there are democrats that do support and vote in favor of Alternative medicine woo, the reality is that they would not be as effective if other Republicans like Orrin Hatch were not for woo too.
On the nuclear front there is a lot of members of the Democratic leadership that are on record of supporting Nuclear power, but sadly, most legislation that supports nuclear power is usually torpedoed by Republicans, simply because it is part of plans to deal with the global warming issue: that is, that when plans are proposed to support alternatives and cleaner energy sources like wind, solar and nuclear, the anti-scientific part of the Republicans is too strong and they are willing to throw the (nuclear) baby with the bathwater.
And as usual, no support then leads to acts like this one languishing in congress.
Generally speaking, her first segment contains the best writing.
I’d agree with that. But I think she’s become more indignant as the NRA has become more extreme. If they still supported background checks, I think she would be more open to having more pro-gun guests.
The whole abortion thing really comes down to religion. There are some people who believe God installs a soul in every zygote.
They are genuinely good and nice people, but are seemingly incapable of recognizing the hypocrisy of their position - that they benefit from publicly built roads, a food safety programs that makes sure they have wholesome food to serve to their customers and from a government program that allows them to have a business in a motherfucking flood plain!
As I said, they have been good customers for decades, and I really like them as people. But…fuck!
Name some specifics of his specific incarnation of that extreme ideology.
Um, how much of the Federal budget is socialist?
jtgain, you do understand that “socialist” does actually have a meaning, and it is not pedophile, mass murderer or divorce attorney, right? You can’t just shout “socialist” and have that stand as some kind of condemnation. That is, being a socialist is not necessarily a bad thing, just like being a conservative is not necessarily a bad thing.
The reason why people object to Obama being called a socialist is because he is not. If you understood the word, you would understand the objection.
Back when Obama was first running, and the “socialist” word was being thrown around like a frisbee at a Republican picnic, I started to wonder how far back I could search to see when they first started using that epithet for their opponents.
I managed to get back over sixty years before I got bored. As near as I can tell, that’s their go-to “vote against my opponent” name-calling. They don’t *care *what the word actually means.
I worked the Republican campaign in 2004. After the polls closed I called the head of the local DNC campaign office to congratulate him on a well run campaign. He told me to go F… myself.
It was then I realized I am to the left, just a revenue source and not a citizen. My government worker friends feel I need to pay more taxes, the investments I have to make to save for my meager retirement… while they get pensions with annuity values in the multiple millions handed to them on my dime.
What kind of campaign did you run? I’d have to know before judging the Democrat. Here in Texas, the thought of any Bush in office will drive many of us to rude language…
And it’s sad to realize that you made poor financial decisions earlier in life. This bleeding heart liberal is sorry for you–but some folks would just remind you that Actions Have Consequences!
Translation: One person was a dickweed, therefore I feel justified in smearing everyone on that side as being less than human. :rolleyes:
I’m a 49ers fan. If a Ravens fan had congratulated me and my team on a good Super Bowl right after a crushing loss, I might not be as polite as I should be. That doesn’t mean the Ravens fan should carry a grudge for the next 9 years about how he’s thought of as being less than human by someone else.
You did a nice thing but it might have come across as gloating. Cut some slack to someone who had a crappy day. Get over yourself and stop thinking you’re the victim. You got your four more years of a terrible president; isn’t that enough for you?
Not to mention taking out the entire context of the nasty 2004 campaign.
How lucky for you to find the Official Spokesperson For The Left on your very first try!
No shit. “Hey, your unpatriotic malingering useless liberal candidate finished just a couple points behind. Way to go!!!”
“Congratulations on running a good campaign so that my side could beat you with one if the nastiest campaigns in recent history.”
The Rep Primary wasn’t pretty either, so ‘the ends justify the means’ extends to even those candidates with your exact ideology.
Shit, that’s right, this thread is about liberals being hateful and nasty individuals.