« previous   misc   next »

Exactly when did "liberals" decide to stop being tolerant?


By dodgerfanjohn   Follow   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 7:21am PST   8,634 views   95 comments   Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (5)   Dislike (2)  

As I remember, one of the core tennents of the "liberal" belief system was tolerance of others...in esence, an emphasis on the ideas:

-that government ought not dictate what goes on between consenting adults behind closed doors.
-freedom of press.
-very strong support of free speech.

Basically an overall belief that as long as someone is doing or saying something that doesn't hurt anyone else, they ought to be able to do it and society and government should protect that person and their right to express themselves.

But that has diminished a great deal. The hatred by some of the left wing posters on this site is quite palpable. There is a STRONG intolerance of the ideas of others.

I'd argue that the concepts I listed above have been taken over by mostly libertarian leaning folks out there. That there are very few true liberals anymore, and that the entire liberal concept has been forcefully outdated, leaving the political spectrum worse for the wear.

IMO it really won't be too long before we see drastic changes in what is considered freedom of speech. I'm already seeing situations where people are asking to move with like minded people. Where if you don't agree with the lifestyle someone else lives, your immediately branded as a person of "hate". Where you are considered an inappropriate parent if you fail to teach your children an appropriately "tolerant" point of view as part of their upbringing.

« First     « Previous     Comments 56-95 of 95     Last »

iwog   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 5:16am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 56

CaptainShuddup says

(I'm finding it hard to spoof a guys post about IDIOTS that riddled with typos and bad grammar everywhere. I'm just as bad, but hey I don't go around calling everyone I disagree with an Idiot.)

I wouldn't call you an idiot for disagreeing with me. I would however call you an idiot if you didn't know why you disagreed with me. Can you think of any instances where this would apply?

Mr Happygoluckofus   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 5:20am PST   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 57

Oh look who it is? If it ain't Mr. "Guess what I'm bitching about?"

I was told there wouldn't be any Math.

Bellingham Bill   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 5:25am PST   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 58

In the recent election we had conservative Republicans actively monkey with early voting in the attempt to limit certain people from voting.

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/05/13682483-florida-limits-early-voting-black-churches-may-move-souls-to-polls-to-saturdays?lite

even to the point of appealing to the supreme court:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/31/federal-judge-restores-3-early-voting-days-in-ohio/

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/ohio-appeals-to-supreme-court-on-early-voting/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/us/politics/justices-reject-appeal-over-early-voting-in-ohio.html

Now THAT was a nexus of stupidity. Conservative southern racists (back before the 1970s they were all Democrats) were very successful with similar institutional vote-suppression bullshit but eventually got beaten back by liberals, including liberal Republicans.

But you guys are still at it with this active stupidity, after the conservative Dems mostly turned Republican and the liberal Republicans disappeared from the map.

There is nothing to "disagree" about this particular issue. If you support conservative Republican attempts at vote suppression, you are both evil AND stupid.

Stupid, because you can't learn from history.

Similarly, there is nothing to "disagree" about not demonizing gay couples, not being afraid of "darwinian" evolution, studying climate change and making draconian economic policies if the science indicates to future disaster, the Republican party's neocon-led warmongering in 2002-2003 was a massive mistake, etc.

Conservatives need to figure out that you guys are living in the 21st century and you can't go back to the 19th, no matter how bad you want to.

Change is going to happen.

Mr Happygoluckofus   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 5:28am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 59

Bellingham Bill says

nexus

It only sounds smart if you use it once per thread.

Mr Happygoluckofus   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 5:30am PST   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 60

Bellingham Bill says

If you support conservative Republican attempts at vote suppression, you are both evil AND stupid.

Stupid, because you can't learn from history.

California has 55 electorate votes, don't lecture people about election fixing.

We live in a democratic society where most of the 50 states have closed primaries while the majority of registered voters are independents. Don't lecture people about election fixing.
The media can saturate the pop American psyche with douche bags that don't warrant a second mention, while stone walling the greatest men our country has to offer. Don't lecture me about election fixing.

Bellingham Bill   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 6:31am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 61

Republicans losing touch with the electorate of California isn't vote suppression.

You guys just suck too much. Here's a nickel, go find a new ideology, one that doesn't suck as much.

rooemoore   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 7:28am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 62

CaptainShuddup says

like I said above, what I hate is all the stupidity. Education Union elitists, gay fundamentalists, and Liberal Democrats don't have the market cornered on stupidity, but it's close and there's certainly a massive nexus of the stuff to be found in these three communites -- which, to be honest here, largely overlap.

Education Union elitists? wtf?
Gay fundamentalists. really?
But liberal democrats, I see your point. The liberal democrats are the ones that give Obama shit for selling out to wall street and the fed. The liberal democrats are the ones who have problems with Obama's executive power abuse. And yes, those annoying liberal democrats who want to rebuild the fucking decimated middle class.

Captain, you could be the poster dude for the old white guys with a bleak future who ironically rail against the only people who will save them.

You are suffering from the Stockholm Syndrome. Wealthy conservatives have held you hostage and yet you have sympathy for them while you hate those who are trying to save you.

You sir, remind me of a certain Berkeley coed:

marcus   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 12:37pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 63

Excellent analysis, and good photoshop job.

msilenus   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 2:32pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 64

Bellingham Bill says

Now THAT was a nexus of stupidity. Conservative southern racists (back before the 1970s they were all Democrats) were very successful with similar institutional vote-suppression bullshit but eventually got beaten back by liberals, including liberal Republicans.

When Nixon made his deal with the devil, and set about the business of curing the Democratic Party of the South, some of his fellow Republicans feared they would lose the black vote for a generation. That proved wildly optimistic. No Republican since has come close to Nixon's Republican predecessor --Eisenhower-- who got 40% of the black vote.

Ohio Republicans tried to take away Sunday voting this year. It was a blatant attempt to suppress the black vote. One of them even admitted it. [1] The black share of voter turnout in Ohio went up more than 30% from 2008.

You're absolutley right that voter suppression targetting minorities is stupid. Especially when you're this blatant about it.

[1] http://www.plunderbund.com/2012/08/19/ohio-republicans-finally-admit-limited-hours-intended-to-suppress-black-voters/

Bellingham Bill   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 2:39pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 65

What's worse is that the Ohio Republicans wanted to open the early polls for only military members!

That's something Godwin-worthy.

Plus the turncoat governor Crist is spilling the beans on Florida's GOP voter suppression effort apparently.

Former GOP chair, governor - both on outs with party - say voter fraud wasn’t a concern, but reducing Democratic votes was.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/early-voting-curbs-called-power-play/nTFDy/

If people come to the realization that this crap was actually happening, say goodbye to the Republican party as a going concern.

What do you do for an encore? Whoops, our bad! We're not so anti-American any more! Or do they double-down, "don't vote for us, we don't need your vote anyway, moochers!"

Or maybe us liberals are just supposed to "tolerate" this?

msilenus   befriend   ignore   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 3:37pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 66

dodgerfanjohn says

As I remember, one of the core tennents of the "liberal" belief system was tolerance of others...in esence, an emphasis on the ideas:
-that government ought not dictate what goes on between consenting adults behind closed doors.
-freedom of press.
-very strong support of free speech.

...

There is a STRONG intolerance of the ideas of others.

What utter nonsense. You have a profound misunderstanding of what free speech is all about.

Free speech is not a guarantee that others will be polite to you when you say stupid things. It is not there to shelter your preconceptions from the winds of harsh criticism. On the contrary: free speech is the right of others to expose the stupidity of what you're saying. When speech is so exercised, it is the opposite of intolerance. It is an attempt to set you straight. Whether you take it that way or not is entirely up to you.

You have the same right, of course, but be warned: the genius of free speech is that shitty ideas lose in a fair fight. If you think you can do better than your fellows who are --I'm sorry: whose ideas are-- getting evicerated, then sack up and sit down. If you have a defense of your point of view, stop bitching, and field it. The only risk you run is the same as everyone else: the risk of coming off a fool.

When that happens, just remember: the other guy is only the messenger.

dublin hillz   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 2:25am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 67

I try to be as civil as possible when discussing politics unless I believe that someone advocates physical violence or taking away rights of their political opponents. Otherwise, I try to do my best to treat political discussions in the format that I would have in a coffee shop - a certain 19th century russian civilized decorum you could say. There's no reason why politics have to be so emotionally charged and bring out the worst in the debaters.

Mr Happygoluckofus   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 2:30am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 68

And I thought I had too much time.

thomaswong.1986   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 3:15am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 69

msilenus says

You're absolutley right that voter suppression targetting minorities is stupid. Especially when you're this blatant about it.

[1] http://www.plunderbund.com/2012/08/19/ohio-republicans-finally-admit-limited-hours-intended-to-suppress-black-voters/

no.. such comments were actually twisted to sound that way..

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/ohio-republican-stands-by-jab-at-black-turnout-ma

Preisse's comment to today's Columbus Dispatch were taken as a smoking gun by Democrats and progressives, who said — as one liberal Ohio blogger wrote — that Preisse had acknowledged an effort to "suppress black voters."

Preisse scoffed at the criticism, telling BuzzFeed of a disputed voting plan put forth by Republican Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted, "I believe it should be easy to vote, and I believe that under this plan it is.

"I believe that Republicans and Democrats of good will can have a difference of opinion, an honest difference of opinion here, but I also believe that there is no question that the forces of Obama and the other side of the aisle would love to just throw the barn doors open and have 24-hour voting and just go too far in the other direction," Preisse said. "It seems to me we can have a reasonable discussion about this."

Of Democrats' early voting efforts, he said, "How far should the taxpayers be asked to go to accommodate that political operation? That’s where we’re having a difference of opinion."

rooemoore   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 3:35am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 70

CaptainShuddup says

And I thought I had too much time.

Very sloppy job took me less than 5 minutes

Mr Happygoluckofus   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 3:38am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 71

You nailed my bitchtits perfectly.

Very well done.

thomaswong.1986   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 3:44am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 72

Bellingham Bill says

Republicans losing touch with the electorate of California isn't vote suppression.

You guys just suck too much. Here's a nickel, go find a new ideology, one that doesn't suck as much.

It was the Rep electorate which voted in Rep government which created California for the 21st century, and a blue print for the world for follow.

Heck even Billy Bob Clinton visited the new miracle which fueled the telecom tech revolution, which created new industries and jobs. He was trying to take some credit and always join the party.. but no one cared why he was here or what he had to day... California became a top 10 world economy on its own long before Clinton became President.

And today, we have the Liberals taking everything down which was created ... taking us back to the stone age. Perhaps all you have is to point to a Ipod/Iphone as your great achievement.

You are now being judged.. will you succeed as great as the California GOP of years past or fall and go Bankrupt as New Your City did during the Liberal heydays of the 1970s?

iwog   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 4:11am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 73

thomaswong.1986 says

And today, we have the Liberals taking everything down which was created ... taking us back to the stone age. Perhaps all you have is to point to a Ipod/Iphone as your great achievement.

You are now being judged.. will you succeed as great as the California GOP of years past or fall and go Bankrupt as New Your City did during the Liberal heydays of the 1970s?

You're babbling is becoming more incoherent. Check out a blue state, red state map and tell me which party has overseen the most economic success while which party rules over stagnation and poverty and welfare.

The only economically viable red states are those in which oil and gas resources provide money and jobs. The rest of the map shows massive failure on the part of Republican administrations.

California, for decades now a Democratic stronghold and considered by many the most liberal place to live, is still the world's 8th largest economy and is currently leading the recovery.

Everything a Republican says regarding economics is an easily disproved lie. I have never in my life met an exception.

msilenus   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 5:12am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 74

thomaswong.1986 says

no.. such comments were actually twisted to sound that way..

Do you know what twisting a statement is? You accused my source of doing that, and then apparently tried to support the claim by providing Preisse's later remarks on his original remarks. That's bogus. To support your claim of unfair quoting, you'd want to add more context to Preisse's original remarks.

No. The quoting of his remarks was entirely fair. And his later 'clarification' is just a restatement of what he said earlier, except without using the word 'black.' (A rare trick, that: attempting to clarify a position by becoming less specific.) He prefers to describe the law in terms of undermining a voter turnout operation. He's welcome to phrase it that way, but a spade is a spade, and that is still voter suppression. And if you think he's being more forthright in his later statement about whom the suppression is aimed at, then I have a bridge to sell you.

ph16   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 5:27am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 75

Honestly, the people who say, "I don't tolerate stupid ideas." Well, did you ever think that people who disagree with you think your ideas are stupid? If so, does the fact that they think your ideas are stupid is any reason to shut them up? Honestly, I think we have to remember that we live in a pluralistic society with competing ideologies and different points of view and we should be careful before labeling those ideas stupid and bigoted.

And note to liberals, just because something's old doesn't mean it's bad.

Bellingham Bill   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 5:52am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 76

ph16 says

Well, did you ever think that people who disagree with you think your ideas are stupid?

"stupid is what stupid does"

If conservatives were honest with themselves they'd see how much harm their ideologic attachment to bullshit has been doing to them and their country since 1980 if not earlier.

The history of this nation 1950 to now has us becoming more conservative, and making bigger and bigger policy mistakes.

Liberals haven't covered themselves in glory opposing this slide into ruin, but they have not been active participants in much of it (other than being goaded by conservatives into doing stupid things like intervene in Indochina in the mid-1960s, or signing off on conservative stupidity like NAFTA, NCLB, and the 2002 AUMF).

Now, I do think all the unfunded pension liabilities of government unions is a policy mistake we can ascribe to "liberals", and in the scheme of things it's not small, $2T+.

But this is a very large, wealth-creating economy still. $15T+. Problem is the top 10% own 90% of its productive assets and clear maybe a third of the income.

This is simply unsustainable. Economies can't get so asymmetric in their wealth flows -- they will eventually seize up and collapse, just like the many bank panics of the 19th century, the Great Depression, and the current Great Recession.

Conservative minarchist ideology does not have any solutions for this challenge of rising inequality, this desire to return to the "old" will just make the imbalances worse.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GINIALLRH

So, "tolerating" stupidity is a form of stupidity, too.

fwiw, I don't think today's "liberals" understand the problems and available solutions all that well, either. They seem to be center-right bumblefucks to me most of the time, TBH.

DukeLaw   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 6:07am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 77

Ah, here we come with the pluralistic "everybody's idea is potentially stupid" retort. Really???

When someone complains about the "religion of science", I'm suppose to engage them in a serious debate?

When someone says that dinosaurs existed with mankind, I'm suppose to assert that "no they didn't"?

When someone says that free speech means I can say anything I want anytime I want, I'm suppose to say "ummm, that's not what I was taught in law school"?

I'm suppose to believe in people who never have looked at a blastocyst under a microscope harp about how a 60 cell ball is a human being?

I'm suppose to listen to people who contort themselves to say that throwing awaying IVF embryos is OK but stem cell research is bad?

In essence, I'm suppose to condone uneducated viewpoints as part of tolerance but allow such uneducated viewpoints to mock my education? How about people get educated so we can have a real discussion?

Nowadays, I'll acknowledge your "opinions", I just won't give any respect to the uneducated ones. Flame away.

Quigley   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 7:02am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 78

We have become a nation of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations. This republican vs. democrat bull shit is just distraction, as are the social issues (gay rights, abortion) that consume the media reporting. Meanwhile your rights and freedoms are being quietly legislated away by BOTH parties, and nobody is reporting it. Who would care? Arguing about who can have gay sex in a Chick-Fil-A is way more interesting than all those dusty laws like habeus corpus, freedom from illegal searches and seizures, and being allowed to freely move yourself and your property from place to place. It's already illegal to rent a moving van to go state to state. And the next big thing is a lock on debit cards, where you won't be allowed to spend more than $10000 abroad on any one trip.
The Iron Curtain Mark II is descending, and the mice are quibbling about their genitals.

Bellingham Bill   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 7:22am PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 79

Quigley says

This republican vs. democrat bull shit is just distraction, as are the social issues (gay rights, abortion) that consume the media reporting

gay rights are not bullshit to gay people, and restricting the legal availability of abortion services is not bullshit to pro-life people.

Quigley says

t's already illegal to rent a moving van to go state to state

News to Budget!

Quigley says

And the next big thing is a lock on debit cards, where you won't be allowed to spend more than $10000 abroad on any one trip.

LOL. It's amazing how off into tinfoil land you are with all of this. There might be a requirement to declare outgoing debit card balances to match how we must declare $10,000 in outgoing currency, but think about what you're writing more por favor.

rooemoore   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 7:24am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 80

Quigley says

It's already illegal to rent a moving van to go state to state.

You sure about that?

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   befriend   ignore   Tue, 27 Nov 2012, 7:56am PST   Share   Quote