Posted on 11/19/2001 2:03:57 PM PST by FF578
Has anyone noticed that the Liberal influence has spread here into Free Republic. I notice that less and less Conservatives seem to post here, and more and more Libertarians seem to be.
I get a letter from someone named NYpeanut who is mad because I posted a discussion based on the Gender Gap in voting.
I didn't make it up, there is really a huge Gender gap with Female Voters tending toward the more liberal candidate. The discussion went well without name calling, but this person seems to have taken issue to the fact that I pointed out women seem to vote more liberally than men.
All those who are newbies here are considered disruptors, and those who hold a more right-winged view than the average libertarian seem to be kicked out.
Why is this? Is this a Libertarian site now?
I have noticed more and more posters standing up for Abortion, Homosexuality, the Porn Industry and Drugs since I first came to this site back before the 2000 Election.
Are Christian Conservatives(Who make up a large part of the Republican core vote) not allowed here anymore?
Just because one holds to a higher power, and wishes to shape society in accordance with the laws of Almighty God, does not make one a Taliban Milita member.
That and facility for teaching Bimbo's to handle snakes. . .
I think I'll stop while I'm less than ahead.
8>)
Home of
|
||||||||
|
|||||
|
By the way, I'm a tobacco chewer. I guess that makes me a hick. Even in liberal San Francisco. Man, that must really screw with your preconceived notions about who I am now. Actually, I had no preconceived notion about where you live or your lifestyle. Some of the worst totalitarian offenders live in the biggest East Coast liberal cities. You see, I fear you like I fear a Teddy Kennedy more than I fear a "Bible Thumping hillbilly." Simply because like Teddy Kennedy, you believe big brother government can solve all the country's problems. You may disagree with him about the end results, but you certainly place faith in his totalitarian, socialistic approach to society. This is why I disagree with your approach. I do not want you, in your misguided and shortsighted attempts to give government power, to discover that that power can easily be turned against you when the balance of power shifts from "your man" to "their man."
I've attempted to explain this and you have no ability to understand why I favor limited government. Instead, you resort to calling me a Liberal and analyzing where I live, as if that will tell you who I am. This is apparently the only thing you know how to do - accuse someone of being something they are just about the opposite of, simply because their approach to government doesn't jive with your naive view of government, totalitarian socialist systems, and the evil it brings down on society.
take care!
Actually, the only reason I checked into the thread was when I saw it was up in the 700's and still growing! (I believe this is the longest thread I've ever posted to... Offhand, does anyone keep track of what the longest thread that has ever existed? I would imagine it would have been one of those "Ignore this thread" threads... hehehe)
Mark W.
If you aren't being petty about a typo and actually disagree with the premise of my statements (or are suggesting that MY argument wasn't coherent), you will have to read our entire exchange before advancing an opinion.
Beyond that, I can't read your mind. Although KC, who I was responding to, might give it a go. I warn you though, his "mindreading" techniques appear to be highly flawed.
I'm more amused, rather than outraged, that you would go tattle tell to Jim when you couldn't think of a response on your own.
Who came up with concept that liberatarians use logic? From what I've seen, it's the antithesis of that. For example:
There is crime. There are illegal drugs. Therefore, illegal drugs cause crime.
Or this one:
It is our right to ingest anything we want. The things we want to ingest are illegal. Therefore, those who oppose our viewpoints are against freedom.
I calls 'em like I sees 'em.
The last resort of somebody who can't articulate a conherant argument against Libertarianism and who fails to see the difference.
I can, but it's usually a waste of time trying to argue with stoned hippies.
Your ignorance continues to show in your name-calling - something Liberals generally resort to when they can't argue with the logical points advanced by a conservative. See? Just like I said. Your approach has reduced us to calling each other liberals. You won't see how you compare though because you are obviously utterly cluesless about what constitutes liberalism, conservatism or libertarianism.
Hey, you can call me a liberal all you want, but I'm not the one living in San Franciso, smoking dope, and putting flowers in my hair.
By the way, I'm a tobacco chewer. I guess that makes me a hick. Even in liberal San Francisco. Man, that must really screw with your preconceived notions about who I am now. Actually, I had no preconceived notion about where you live or your lifestyle. Some of the worst totalitarian offenders live in the biggest East Coast liberal cities.
Nah, I know plenty of hippies that have switched to chew. Smoking is not politically correct right now.
You see, I fear you like I fear a Teddy Kennedy more than I fear a "Bible Thumping hillbilly." Simply because like Teddy Kennedy, you believe big brother government can solve all the country's problems.
I don't think big brother government can solve any of todays problems. I do believe that government (read: WE THE PEOPLE) have a right to limit actions harmful to society (READ: WE THE PEOPLE). Libertarians, on the other hand, think that society or government (WE THE PEOPLE) have no right to limit things that they "perceive" as being harmless...and thus when they try to adovocate a view or change a law, they (like liberals) resort to emotionalism and appeals to strawmen.
You may disagree with him about the end results, but you certainly place faith in his totalitarian, socialistic approach to society. This is why I disagree with your approach. I do not want you, in your misguided and shortsighted attempts to give government power, to discover that that power can easily be turned against you when the balance of power shifts from "your man" to "their man."
You couldn't be more wrong. The end results of libertarian policy WILL be the exact results that Teddy Kennedy wants. Why do you think liberal and libertarians fight for generally the same cultural issues? It's because destruction of culture must occur BEFORE destruction of government. You libertarians have been duped into thinking that your "causes" are patriotic and conservative when in reality they are only the same old lame attempts to destroy American culture that liberals have been trying to do for years.
I've attempted to explain this and you have no ability to understand why I favor limited government. Instead, you resort to calling me a Liberal and analyzing where I live, as if that will tell you who I am. This is apparently the only thing you know how to do - accuse someone of being something they are just about the opposite of, simply because their approach to government doesn't jive with your naive view of government, totalitarian socialist systems, and the evil it brings down on society.
I don't mind that libertarians favor limited government, but it seems like the government they are most interested in limiting are the functions that have to do with restrictions on drugs and porn.
Perhaps, but I noticed that you didn't attempt to refute them. Good day.
Not much different than the Islamic Fundamentalists, except, perhaps for the violence against human life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.