Industrial Deals Beauty Best Books of the Year So Far STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Starting at $39.99 Wickedly Prime Handmade Wedding Rustic Decor Shop Popular Services TheTick TheTick TheTick  Introducing Echo Show All-New Fire 7, starting at $49.99 Kindle Oasis GNO Water Sports STEMClubToys17_gno

Democrats; Why do they HATE so much?.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 244 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Aug 11, 2009, 4:42:18 PM PDT
Mark says:
The dems who say they love their country will offers quarter to our enemies quicker than a non hatefueled speach against any conservative/Republican. The only Enemy they see is their fellow Americans who Dare to disagree with their socialist agenda. They spew Hatred and venom against "repugs" and "neocons" but at the same time preach diversity and understanding. Can anyone make sense of this??

Posted on Aug 11, 2009, 4:48:59 PM PDT
Mark says:
Check this out. Democrat talkking points. www.newblackpanther.com

Interesting to say the least.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 12, 2009, 8:10:27 AM PDT
John Hancock says:
Mark..Rush Limbaugh, frustratedly responded yesterday that arguing the merits of President Obama is like arguing with the american people with him running for class president of his high school, its amateurish. and conflicting of positions depending who the audience might be. example: his single payer stances one year saying he'd never support it...another speech he's always supported it. which Obama are we getting?

Posted on Aug 12, 2009, 11:32:05 AM PDT
Pecos Bill says:
Entitlement.

That one word explains virtually everything you need to know about the left. They want government sponsored health care because they are entitled to it. They want you to shut up about it because nowhere in their personal sense of entitlement does it involve you having an opinion of your own or speaking it in any format. They are entitled to impose cap and trade on industry. They are entitled trade in their old car for a new one with a big government rebate. They are entitled to low taxes while voting for high taxes on people who are not them.

If you say anything negative, you are encroaching on their entitlements. That is why they become so angry.

As a good conservative, think about how you feel about freedom, access to the opportunity to work and vote and breath air. To understand liberals, you have to understand that they feel that same way about EVERYTHING.

They feel about health care the same way you feel about the right to vote.
They feel about the Prius the same way you feel about the right to own a gun.
If you tell them they can't get discounts for buying a Prius or they can't get free government health care, it's like someone going up to you and taking away your right to vote and own a gun. You would be outraged. Lefties are outraged like this all the time.

If liberals wrote the Constitution it would be 1042 pages long, filled with things that they have a right (not a privilege! a right!) to possess or control. And Item #1 would be the right to silence anyone who objects to their personal sense of entitlement.

Posted on Aug 12, 2009, 1:27:00 PM PDT
Wraith Lord says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Aug 12, 2009, 1:27:12 PM PDT
Wraith Lord says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Aug 12, 2009, 2:56:01 PM PDT
Deckard says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 12, 2009, 11:19:02 PM PDT
redshift says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Aug 13, 2009, 5:18:35 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 13, 2009, 5:19:31 AM PDT
A. Rothman says:
Pecos Bill,

I rarely seen the dichotomy between liberals (in the classical sense) and leftists explained with such clarity and brevity. The only thing I would add, is leftists aren't content with you keeping your vote, or your gun. ACORN's machinations in vote fraud dilutes the power of legitimate votes, as does the push for voting rights for illegal aliens. And when was the last time the ACLU was involved in a case involving the civil right to keep and bear arms...on the side of the Bill of Rights?

Nor are leftists content with leaving your opportunity to work inviolate. If the union card check bill passes through Congress, your right to private ballot on the question of unionization will be gone. That means voting in favor of economic liberty will lead to harassment by union thugs, and the likely loss of your job if a union infects your workplace.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 15, 2009, 11:24:58 AM PDT
John Hancock says:
A. Rothman..watching ACORN file out of those school buses at one of the town hall meetings in their bright red shirts and shouting chants leaving the bus steps. Makes you feel like here comes the calvary to save the day...lord help us.

Posted on Aug 17, 2009, 8:27:58 AM PDT
Pecos Bill says:
I always like how conservative rallies involve a bunch of signs that look like they were made at home out of cardboard and sharpies while liberal rallies involve professionally made signs and printed t-shirts.

Is it odd that the left has all the money behind them?

Hmmm. I guess not. Conservatives always were a kind of a do-it-yourself group. We frown on people handing us signs because we have plenty of our own thoughts to write down.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 21, 2009, 10:48:49 AM PDT
M. Hatter says:
You guys are a scream! Acting like the Constitution is some sacred document like the Bible or something! The document was an interesting but flawed (why so many amendments if perfect) excuse to perpetrate the biggest land grab in world history. It wasn't about freedom and equality it was about power! Read up on the actions of those writing it....they cared not a whit for it's high minded rhetoric. Thomas Paine was the only real revolutionary, and all should read his "Common Sense" before reading any comtemporary knockoffs.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 21, 2009, 11:46:16 AM PDT
Deckard says:
Actually, you have a point. What happened in only a few generations when people wanted to exercise these same liberties? The US prevented the Confederate States from doing so. The US was interested more in control of land than principles.

That's how it is in practice - still the best attempt to govern men when observed - it simply isn't and that is the problem.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 21, 2009, 11:50:03 AM PDT
A. Rothman says:
I haven't noticed many treating the Constitution as sacred. I haven't noticed many claiming it is without flaws. However, it is the law of the land. This simple fact does not stop many in power from exceeding the limits it places on government.

"It wasn't about freedom and equality it was about power!"

Well, in a way, you're right! The Constitution's purpose is primarily to constrain the federal government. It states what functions the federal government may perform, and explicitly leaves the rest to the states, or to the people. So yes, the Constitution is about power...the limitation of power.

As to the rest of your ad hominem against the founders: yawn. We've heard it all before. Attack the message, not the messenger, if your beef is with the Constitution.

BTW, would your fondness for Paine have anything to do with his differences with organized religion? One wonders what your litmus test for a "true revolutionary" is. Call people "reactionary" much?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 23, 2009, 2:30:50 PM PDT
Woolley says:
We hate conservatives? Who exactly is giving you that information? Did you hear it from mark levin? Michael Savage? Ann Coulter?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 23, 2009, 5:05:02 PM PDT
Deckard says:
Those 3 neocons you listed may have said that.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 23, 2009, 10:38:39 PM PDT
John Hancock says:
with every group you have a yin and a yang principle to it. Conservatives..With Mark Levin, Mark Savage and Ann Coulter ..definitely yang, fire breathing animals to the more yin, suave and sophisticated George Will, the late- William F. Buckley Jr. and comprimising across the "aisle" Sen. John McCain. For liberals you have fire breathing TV personalities Keith Obermann, Bill Maher Sen. Howard Dean and Barbara Steisand to the more yin sophisticated, pundit Juan Williams, comedian Dave Letterman and the late economist John David Gailbraith (who spared frequently with William F. Buckley jr.) So their really is balance that way. Hate and love to hate, "civil-like"

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 24, 2009, 10:49:52 AM PDT
Woolley says:
Wait a minute. Keith Olberman? He has about 1 million viewers a night and is hardly a national leader. A couple years ago, he was a sportscaster. Babs? Are you joking? The combined audience and coverage for the major conservative pundits on all forms of media is enormous. When you throw in the Dr Lauras, the Haggees, Christian radio and so on, its astounding anyone on the left can get a word in edgewise....

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 24, 2009, 11:24:00 AM PDT
K. webster says:
as an independent I can never understand why both the far right and far left think its the other guy spewing hate. listen to them both, they both are in different ways. why can't they understand that?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 24, 2009, 7:31:43 PM PDT
John Hancock says:
Woolley..good point about Keith Obermann..I wasn't going that way with the volume of listeners per se, but as you bring that up your right for a balance representation, it wouldn't be. But for nationally known speakers is where I was going, that speak their opposite views. And a larger disportionate wedge is growing by the day in the health care debate when democrats are fighting with democrats and "no" republican is for this upcoming bill, and they are as galvanized together on this than they have been on anything for a long time.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 25, 2009, 7:02:34 AM PDT
Woolley says:
First of all, I really do not equate the type of discourse of a Michael Savage with the Olberman shtick. Michael Savage calls all liberals traitors, vermin and pond scum. Olberman says Billo is a jerk and that Bush lied so people died. One is an opinion that is intended to inflame and besmirch an entire class of American, the other is a reaction to specific policies or decisions. Had Billo or Bush done something else, Keith would congratulate them. I have heard so much right wing radio over the last 20 odd years that I can gaurantee you, it is based on the goal of polarizing the people in order to make a buck or political point. If all we were talking about was one guy shouting in the wind, no one would care. But the list of right wingers on the radio, TV, print, media is astounding. Just look at the MSM today. The right got pounded in the elections yet here is almost every show providing full sets of people that represent the right in numbers that overwhelm the one or two token liberals. Had anyone shown up with a gun to any Bush rally they would have been in Gitmo in 1 minute and the media would have gone ballistic. No, there is no comparison to the left and right in terms of message. One is a reaction to a barrage of insults, slurs and lies, the other is a barrage.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 25, 2009, 2:46:07 PM PDT
Deckard says:
What is a "right winger"?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 26, 2009, 10:20:25 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 27, 2009, 5:26:21 AM PDT
John Hancock says:
Woolley..i think you give Obermann much too much credit for not being partial like the other side is, admittedly. Obermann's reactions from policies that fit the liberal agenda. Just like Hannity's reactions are from the conservative hand book....lies and slurs are from us poor slubs that don't get paid a penny to get inflamed by our rich partiality "leaders" in the media.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 28, 2009, 7:57:18 AM PDT
Woolley says:
He is one of a very few vocal and strong voices on the left. I wish there were hundreds of them on the radio and TV. Am I partisan? You betcha.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 6, 2009, 10:50:15 AM PDT
F. Toft says:
Democrats hate America becuase they see it as standing in the way of the triumph of Socialism. In their twisted minds, Socialism only failed becasue of the opposition to it by The United States. They also hate America because they feel we are responsible for all of the poverty in the Third World. They think other nations are poor becuase we, the greedy people in the United States, have taken from them. They think our greed is responsible for all of the poverty in the World. They don't see that it's our freedom and liberty that have made us the greatest country in the World. This point of logic is simply tossed aside. They also simply ignore the fact that hundreds of thousands of Americans have died fighting to free others from tyranny and if it were not for the United States, most of the World would be enslaved today and that those that are living in slavery are living under Socialism. I refer you to a post in the disussion further on down where a so called Liberal describes his hatred of The U. S. Constituion. They still believe that Socialsim is the answer even when it has been responsible for the enslavement and poverty of the Third World. Arguing logic with these people is futile as their philosophy is all emotion and Socialist dogma!
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  27
Total posts:  244
Initial post:  Aug 11, 2009
Latest post:  Jan 11, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

This discussion is about
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto by Mark R. Levin (Audio CD - March 24, 2009)
4.8 out of 5 stars (3,387)