20 Questions Liberals Can't Answer

This was sparked off by another debate in World Politics, so I decided to post this up as I found the questions interesting:


20 Questions Liberals Can't Answer

"It is not enough for the insecure left to deem a position wrong; if it’s merely wrong, it needs to be argued about, and it can’t survive that. It must instead be morally abhorrent, so that the zealot reacts to the toxin of questioning much like a jogger coming across a decomposing body on the side of the road — it must be internalized that the correct response to such a horror is to retch, and faint, and call the authorities post-haste.
This is how the leftist faith protects itself from the infection of doubt. (Meanwhile, of course, patting itself on the back for being so open-minded…)" -- Ace of Spades HQ

"If it were true that conservatives were racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist, stupid, inflexible, angry, and self-righteous, shouldn’t their arguments be easy to deconstruct? Someone who is making a point out of anger, ideology, inflexibility, or resentment would presumably construct a flimsy argument. So why can’t the argument itself be dismembered rather than the speaker’s personal style or hidden motives? Why the evasions?" -- Ann Coulter
Liberalism doesn't convince with logic. It can't, because the policies liberals advocate don't work. So instead, liberals have to use emotion-based ploys and attack the motives of people they disagree with while attempting to keep conservative arguments from being heard at all. Why? Because they have no good answers to questions like these.

1) A few days ago, we were hearing that the Boston Marathon bombers COULD BE conservative, which proved that the Right is evil. Now, when we know that the terrorists are Muslims, how can the same liberals be saying that it means nothing?

2) If you believe we have a "right" to things like health care, food, shelter and a good education, then doesn't that also mean you believe we also have a right to force other people to unwillingly provide those things at gunpoint?

3) How can you simultaneously want a big government that will make decisions that have an enormous impact on the lives of every American while also saying that the character and morals of our politicians don't matter?

4) What exactly is the "fair share" of someone's income that he’s earned that he should be able to keep?

5) Why is it that time and time again, revenue paid to the treasury has GONE UP after we've cut taxes?

6) Are you pro-choice or pro-abortion? If it's pro-choice, do you feel people should be able to choose to have an assault weapon, what kind of light bulb they use in their house or whether they'd like to put their Social Security funds into a private retirement account?

7) If corporations are so awful, greedy and bad for the country, then shouldn't we be celebrating when they decide to close their plants here and move overseas?

How can liberal economists like Paul Krugman be right when they claim that our economy isn't doing well because we aren't spending enough money when we're already running massive, unsustainable deficits and spending is going up every year?

9) If Republicans don’t care about the poor, why do studies consistently show that they give more to charity than Democrats do?

10) Give us a ballpark estimate: If something doesn't change dramatically, how long do you think it will be until we have an economic crash in this country similar to the one we're seeing in Greece or Cyprus?

11) Since we "all agree" with the idea that our level of deficit spending is "unsustainable," what would be wrong with permanently freezing federal spending at the current level until we balance the budget by increasing revenue, cutting spending or some combination thereof?

12) If we change God's definition of marriage to make gay marriage legal, then what's the logical argument against polygamy or even adult siblings supposed to be?

13) In a world where people can easily change states and can, with a bit more difficulty, permanently move to other roughly comparable parts of the globe, do you really think it's feasible over the long haul to have a tax system where 86% of the income taxes are paid by the top 25% of the income earners?

14) If you win a lawsuit that's filed against you, why should you have to pay huge legal bills when you did nothing wrong while the person who filed the suit pays no penalty for wrongly accusing you?

15) How can you oppose putting murderers to death and be fine with killing innocent children via abortion?

16) A minimum wage raises salaries for some workers at the cost of putting other workers out of jobs entirely. What's the acceptable ratio for that? For every 10 people who get a higher salary, how many are you willing to see lose their jobs?

17) The earth has been warming and cooling for thousands of years with temperature drops and increases that are much larger than the ones we've seen over the last century. Since we can't adequately explain or model those changes, what makes us think we can say with any sort of confidence that global warming is being caused by man?

18) We live in a world where people have more choices than ever before in music, entertainment, careers, news sources and what to do with their time. Shouldn't government mirror that trend by moving towards federalism and states’ rights instead of centralizing more and more power in Washington, DC?

19) If people in the middle class aren't willing to pay enough in taxes to cover the government services that they use because they don't think it's worth the money, shouldn't we prune back government to a level people do feel comfortable paying for in taxes?

20) If firms can get by with paying women 72 cents on the dollar for the same quality of work as men, then why don't we see any firms with all female labor forces using those lower costs to dominate the marketplace?


http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2013/04/20/20-questions-liberals-cant-answer-n1573545

Just a bunch of bullshit strawmanning, really. Many of the questions actually have been answered by the left, and many others are built on faulty premises. I'll take a crack at them, though:

1) A few days ago, we were hearing that the Boston Marathon bombers COULD BE conservative, which proved that the Right is evil. Now, when we know that the terrorists are Muslims, how can the same liberals be saying that it means nothing?

Was the "official position" of all liberals that the bombers were right-wingers and that that proved that all right wingers were evil bombing terrorists? Of course not.

2) If you believe we have a "right" to things like health care, food, shelter and a good education, then doesn't that also mean you believe we also have a right to force other people to unwillingly provide those things at gunpoint?

We actually believe that in a powerful, wealthy nation, citizens SHOULD have the right to those things, and the fact that we don't speaks poorly of our nation.

3) How can you simultaneously want a big government that will make decisions that have an enormous impact on the lives of every American while also saying that the character and morals of our politicians don't matter?

Liberals want a government that is big enough to take care of people in need, not to run their lives. Questions about politicians' character and morals usually really means what they do in the privacy of their bedrooms, which shouldn't impact their leadership ability.

4) What exactly is the "fair share" of someone's income that he’s earned that he should be able to keep?

That depends on the needs of the nation, but the United States has never taken the majority of anyone's income and no liberal supports doing that. In the '50s and '60s there were plenty of millionaires and wealthy people, despite the fact that the top bracket was taxed more than double what it is today.

5) Why is it that time and time again, revenue paid to the treasury has GONE UP after we've cut taxes?

It has? Then why was Reagan forced to follow the biggest tax cut in U.S. history with the biggest tax hike in U.S. history, in order to not bankrupt the government?

6) Are you pro-choice or pro-abortion? If it's pro-choice, do you feel people should be able to choose to have an assault weapon, what kind of light bulb they use in their house or whether they'd like to put their Social Security funds into a private retirement account?

Nobody is "pro-abortion;" nobody cheers for abortions.

Access to abortion is a basic human right and has actually helped society. Access to assault weapons is a separate issue, as they've been used in mass killings which we all want to reduce, right? Regulating light bulbs is necessary to protect the environment that we all have to live in. That's also a separate issue.

Should people be free to choose to be deceived into the notion that their retirement savings are in safer hands on the Wall Street rollercoaster than in the most consistently safe and productive investment product in the world? Maybe ... but it would mean a lot more elderly people living on the streets, so it's not going to happen.

7) If corporations are so awful, greedy and bad for the country, then shouldn't we be celebrating when they decide to close their plants here and move overseas?

They are awful and greedy and do bad things to the country, but they also provide jobs our people need. They can't just clean up their act and still provide jobs?

8 ) How can liberal economists like Paul Krugman be right when they claim that our economy isn't doing well because we aren't spending enough money when we're already running massive, unsustainable deficits and spending is going up every year?

Spending goes up every year just like the population does; you wouldn't spend the same on a family of three that you would on a family of 12. We're not actually running unsustainable deficits, so that part of the question is bunk, and massive is a point of view. Every amount on a federal government budget looks massive to a solitary person.

9) If Republicans don’t care about the poor, why do studies consistently show that they give more to charity than Democrats do?

The real question should be, if Republicans care about the poor, why do they insist on helping them via a system that has proven not to work nearly as well as welfare?

By spending 2.3 percent of the federal budget on the needy, we've reduced poverty by 26.4 percent in the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare%27s_effect_on_poverty What if we made that an even five percent? We'd still spend slightly less than Ireland, which has reduced poverty by 44.1 percent.

10) Give us a ballpark estimate: If something doesn't change dramatically, how long do you think it will be until we have an economic crash in this country similar to the one we're seeing in Greece or Cyprus?

A thousand years? Greece and Cyprus simply can't be compared to the U.S., which has a vastly larger economy and doesn't have nearly the social welfare programs that those countries had even under austerity measures.

11) Since we "all agree" with the idea that our level of deficit spending is "unsustainable," what would be wrong with permanently freezing federal spending at the current level until we balance the budget by increasing revenue, cutting spending or some combination thereof?

Well, we don't "all agree," so ... the fact of the matter is that freezing spending would ultimately harm children living in poverty, while raising taxes on the wealthy might possibly mean a less lavish vacation for a rich person. So let's talk about character and morals again, shall we?

12) If we change God's definition of marriage to make gay marriage legal, then what's the logical argument against polygamy or even adult siblings supposed to be?

I don't believe in God, so guess what? I can define marriage any way I want. I have no argument against polygamy (is your mind blown?), and I don't know what a "logical argument against adult siblings" would look like, since I'm an adult with adult siblings ...

13) In a world where people can easily change states and can, with a bit more difficulty, permanently move to other roughly comparable parts of the globe, do you really think it's feasible over the long haul to have a tax system where 86% of the income taxes are paid by the top 25% of the income earners?

Yes. Most people are tied to their homes by more than a deep connection to the rate they pay taxes at. If someone wants to leave America because they make $1.3 million a year and someone wants to raise the amount they pay on that .3 by five percent, then I will be happy to get them some boxes. I'll even wave goodbye to them at the airport.

14) If you win a lawsuit that's filed against you, why should you have to pay huge legal bills when you did nothing wrong while the person who filed the suit pays no penalty for wrongly accusing you?

Who says that's a good system?

15) How can you oppose putting murderers to death and be fine with killing innocent children via abortion?

Abortion is generally performed before the fetus has become viable (and women spontaneously abort about 40 percent of pregnancies); capital punishment is ultimately about whether the government is so perfect that it should be given power over life and death.

16) A minimum wage raises salaries for some workers at the cost of putting other workers out of jobs entirely. What's the acceptable ratio for that? For every 10 people who get a higher salary, how many are you willing to see lose their jobs?

This simply isn't true; studies have shown that raising the minimum wage initially might mean a few jobs are lost, but later, jobs are added as consumers begin to spend their extra money and businesses grow.

17) The earth has been warming and cooling for thousands of years with temperature drops and increases that are much larger than the ones we've seen over the last century. Since we can't adequately explain or model those changes, what makes us think we can say with any sort of confidence that global warming is being caused by man?

We understand enough about natural climate change to know that it happens over much longer time spans (hundreds of thousands, or millions, of years) than it is happening now (centuries). We know what kind of gases cause the atmosphere to warm, and we know that we're putting those gases into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

18) We live in a world where people have more choices than ever before in music, entertainment, careers, news sources and what to do with their time. Shouldn't government mirror that trend by moving towards federalism and states’ rights instead of centralizing more and more power in Washington, DC?

The problem with decentralization is that it makes it much easier for local corrupt governments to discriminate against people they don't like. The federal government must always have the authority to intervene on the behalf of any citizen, regardless of how locally unpopular they may be, and protect their rights. (If you think it would be dangerous to be an open Satanist in Alabama, try doing it without the federal government being able to keep the Baptists in the state government from framing you for murder and executing you.)

19) If people in the middle class aren't willing to pay enough in taxes to cover the government services that they use because they don't think it's worth the money, shouldn't we prune back government to a level people do feel comfortable paying for in taxes?

Taxes should be lowered for the middle class and raised on the rich. We're at a period of nearly unprecedented wealth inequality in this country.

20) If firms can get by with paying women 72 cents on the dollar for the same quality of work as men, then why don't we see any firms with all female labor forces using those lower costs to dominate the marketplace?

Because those same firms are still too greedy to cater to a workforce that has the health and lifestyle needs of women. They begrudgingly hire women so they don't seem like sexists, but they still pay them a lot less and shut women out of many sectors of the economy -- they really want a workforce of workaholic men.

Wow, what an ENORMOUS waste of my time!

Hahahahaha you fucking grump I never asked you to do it!

You couldn't resist it cos the steam came out of your ears and you had to reply....took you long enough to show up

eddie wrote:Hahahahaha you fucking grump I never asked you to do it!

You couldn't resist it cos the steam came out of your ears and you had to reply....took you long enough to show up

It's like this. My dog poops in the corner; do I ignore it or clean it up?

Hahahahahaha you absolutely crack me up! I posted that and I KNEW you'd read it and go "Pfffff I am not answering this.... it's stupid!" ....then you just couldn't resist, got yourself all annoyed and then shout at everyone that you've wasted your time

I gave you a thanks - it's the least I can do

If it's any consolation Benji, I reckon no one will top it.

eddie wrote:Hahahahahaha you absolutely crack me up! I posted that and I KNEW you'd read it and go "Pfffff I am not answering this.... it's stupid!" ....then you just couldn't resist, got yourself all annoyed and then shout at everyone that you've wasted your time

I gave you a thanks - it's the least I can do

What is your point?

eddie wrote:If it's any consolation Benji, I reckon no one will top it.

Nobody here can, because I take this stuff seriously and have my answers and positions ready, having thought them through quite deeply and having years of researching and defending them. This ain't casual to me, it's not a hobby or a pastime.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Hahahahahaha you absolutely crack me up! I posted that and I KNEW you'd read it and go "Pfffff I am not answering this.... it's stupid!" ....then you just couldn't resist, got yourself all annoyed and then shout at everyone that you've wasted your time

I gave you a thanks - it's the least I can do

What is your point?

It's a private joke.
What the point you're making by sticking your nose in? Were you ready to tell me off?

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:If it's any consolation Benji, I reckon no one will top it.

Nobody here can, because I take this stuff seriously and have my answers and positions ready, having thought them through quite deeply and having years of researching and defending them. This ain't casual to me, it's not a hobby or a pastime.

Well that told me.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Hahahahahaha you absolutely crack me up! I posted that and I KNEW you'd read it and go "Pfffff I am not answering this.... it's stupid!" ....then you just couldn't resist, got yourself all annoyed and then shout at everyone that you've wasted your time
I gave you a thanks - it's the least I can do

What is your point?

To answer your question Quill ...GOADING, and insulting was the 'point'; for someone that says she "appreciates members that think/post outside THE BOX"     

Yet the #1 source she commonly uses is a from a firmly grounded RIGHT LEANING BLOGGER, shows a pattern of oxymoron method to her need to twist a thought process  
Ben was being polite to even respond and she reacted to his answer with insults, to you with a chide for responding (wasn't I told private conversations should be via a PM) 

John Hawkins is a batshit-crazy wingnut who runs the website Right Wing News and regularly contributes articles to the radical right side of the clogosphere. He likes to make listicles of "facts" that cater to his fringy audience, who in turn adore him for being politically incorrect. He writes columns for both Townhall.com and PJ Media, and has made a name for himself as the poor man's Erick Erickson, if you thought that was evev possible") "People who want to change sexes should be treated by a psychologist, not deformed through surgery, given hormone treatments, and falsely told that they can change sexes."Perhaps the best way to discredit Hawkins is to simply quote just one of the lists he's made.

"8.) Most liberals aren't patriotic and they don't love their country."
"9) Our soldiers should make every effort to avoid civilian casualties, but when it comes right down to it, the life of an American soldier should be treated as more important than the life of a foreign civilian."
"11) The only practical way to make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is for the Israelis to transfer the Palestinians and take their land."
"19) If you have good character, you should feel ashamed of taking food stamps, taking welfare, or being on a school lunch program."
Yes, you read that right, a school lunch program.
"20) We would be much better off as a nation if most of the immigrants to this country were well educated people from nations in Europe that shared our Western values as opposed to our current policy which brings in mostly less educated people from Third World nations."
Because well-to-do immigrants would do the backbreaking labor that keeps our economy going.
In his list "25 Reasons To Dislike Liberals" he gives us some more delicious quotes because there is so much strawman everywhere.
"2) Because the closest thing to Sodom and Gomorrah in the modern world is San Francisco and Berkeley."
"3) Whether you're talking about cop killers, terrorists, radical Islamists or dictators, all you have to do is say, "I hate America," and liberals start to sympathize with you."
"4) Liberals are actually bothered by people who do love America. On the rare occasion when you do see a liberal waving a flag, look for a camera."
"5) The same people who voted Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama into office think they're smarter than tradition, the Founding Fathers and God Himself."
"11) The dumbest, most close-minded and mean spirited people in all of politics are inevitably liberals who are convinced they're brilliant, open-minded and compassionate because they call themselves liberals."
"18) Liberals have been big supporters of slavery, Indian massacres, the KKK, eugenics, fascism, communism and Jim Crow laws. Then, down the road, after liberals finally join everyone else, they try to claim that conservatives still support all the practices that we fought liberals on from the beginning."
Like most wingnuts, Hawkins thinks that the Republican Party was always conservative and the Democratic Party was always liberal. Calling them commie sympathizers is the oddest accusation, since liberals like Franklin D. Roosevelt and Hubert Humphrey were thought of as the hawks during World War II and the early stages of the Cold War (before the rise of the New Left), while the Old Right of the 1940s and '50s, led by the likes ofRobert A. Taft, was more isolationist and opposed confronting the Nazis or the Soviets.
"19) Liberals think black Americans are inferior to whites, which is why the worst, most crime-ridden places to live in America are inevitably run by liberals. That's acceptable to liberals because they don't think black Americans deserve any better."
"25) Even "liberal Christians" are generally supportive of other liberals who attack Christianity, which is why "liberal Christians" is in quotes."
As ridiculous as it may seem, these lists make wingnuts fawn over Hawkins despite theirintellectual laziness. Many of them believe he is pushing true Christian values. As if that's not enough he also pushes global warming denialism,claiming that "Liberal luddites who hate capitalism and industry have spent billions to spread global warming propaganda, despite the fact that it looks more like a fraud, a scam, and a hustle every year." Not surprisingly, he's also pretty sexist, and once claimed that no woman deserves to be regarded as among the greatest Americans because no woman has ever made a great contribution to this country's history.

Hypocrisy

Despite Hawkins' self-proclaimed dislike for liberals because he thinks they play the "race card" and/or the "victim", Hawkins himself got in trouble when he sent out a tweet saying "a white woman voting for Barack Obama is like a black woman voting for the KKK".  Hawkins is also great at playing the victim, believing that homeschooled kids are better off because liberals indoctrinate students
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_Hopkins 

I'm beginning to see a pretty FOUL PATTERN to the reasons for her rational behind some of her topics and the SPIRIT & INTENT behind the meaning is anything but WARM &FRIENDLY ...but she'll deny being a GAME PLAYER 

THOSE questions have nothing to do with genuine discussions over what liberals and conservatives actually do believe in  !!!

Rather, they are a ridiculous mix of red herrings, nonsensical rhetoric, "straw man" arguments, bluster and outright bullshit..

Obviously composed by some uneducated, far-right stirrer in the conservative/Zionist/Tea party propaganda industry -- written for the sole purpose of attacking something that the author doesn't simply not like -- but doesn't even understand !

AS IS clearly demonstrated by his/her total ignorance of what the term "liberal" even means, and their mistaken use of the phrase "middle class" in their attempted diatribe..        

4ever you have got it so so so wrong.

We were discussing liberals and politics on another thread and I I said I thought I was probably liberal.

I found that article and thought it really stupid. I knew Ben would like it and it was a private wind-up joke between us, hence my posts to him.

When he comes along later and puts you right I hope you have the good grace to aplogise to me and to check yourself: you have a really horrible way of looking at people and the world.

I feel sorry for you. You must hate your life.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

THOSE questions have nothing to do with genuine discussions over what liberals and conservatives actually do believe in  !!!

Rather, they are a ridiculous mix of red herrings, nonsensical rhetoric, "straw man" arguments, bluster and outright bullshit..

Obviously composed by some uneducated, far-right stirrer in the conservative/Zionist/Tea party propaganda industry -- written for the sole purpose of attacking something that the author doesn't simply not like -- but doesn't even understand !

AS IS clearly demonstrated by his/her total ignorance of what the term "liberal" even means, and their mistaken use of the phrase "middle class" in their attempted diatribe..        

It's badly constructed and I posted it tongue in cheek; hence my subsequent posts.
But whatever.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

THOSE questions have nothing to do with genuine discussions over what liberals and conservatives actually do believe in  !!!

Rather, they are a ridiculous mix of red herrings, nonsensical rhetoric, "straw man" arguments, bluster and outright bullshit..

Obviously composed by some uneducated, far-right stirrer in the conservative/Zionist/Tea party propaganda industry -- written for the sole purpose of attacking something that the author doesn't simply not like -- but doesn't even understand !

AS IS clearly demonstrated by his/her total ignorance of what the term "liberal" even means, and their mistaken use of the phrase "middle class" in their attempted diatribe..        

EXACTLY ...when all ones does is 'THINK WITHIN A BOX/LABEL PEOPLE' and then try to be so 'coy/lame' about how they "don't judge" ...yet their posts come off as quite the opposite and very telling! 

Perpetrating lies to make ones self-esteem feel better  - the false exterior just doesn't wear well - rather like a ill fitted suit tells the world that you're not dressed/behaving as your REAL TRUTH projects

no comment

eddie wrote:4ever you have got it so so so wrong.

We were discussing liberals and politics on another thread and I I said I thought I was probably liberal.

I found that article and thought it really stupid. I knew Ben would like it and it was a private wind-up joke between us, hence my posts to him.

When he comes along later and puts you right I hope you have the good grace to aplogise to me and to check yourself: you have a really horrible way of looking at people and the world.

I feel sorry for you. You must hate your life.

My experience with forums has basically trained me to twist off on posts like this - - got started in the Bush years if that tells you anything.

But I didn't think you agreed with it, and it would be nice if others here stopped acting like you do.

Now I will wait for 4ever to apologise to me.

It isn't my fault that people look for the bad in all things.

eddie wrote:Now I will wait for 4ever to apologise to me.

It isn't my fault that people look for the bad in all things.  

Re: Hypocrites are the worst kind of people
 by eddie on Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:05 am
I don't care what you think, you know you're a liar and a hypocrite and that's all I need to know.

And least we forget that epic vibrant choice of "'Hypocritical fucktards' take note: Here are some warning signs of THE HYPOCRITE:"

Re: David Icke on Michelle Obama - does he have a point?
 by eddie on Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:56 am

4EVER2 wrote:


  

Are you telling me you don't remember you, and I and sassy laughing about trumps hair and his face?????
You call him Cheeto-Jesus!
You two are too fucking old for forums if you can't remember something we laughed at a few weeks ago.
Or you're lying.
So which is it? Are you senile or a liar?

Would seem redundant to offer up an apology - when an apology isn't warranted and YOU'VE CLEARLY STATED {rather numerous times in your hysteria rants this past few days} THAT I AM A FUCKTARD - HYPOCRITE - SENILE - LIAR - TO OLD FOR FORUMS; and then you devoted an entire topic just about that specific issue for which you've never apologized to the entire membership for breaking the NEWEST RULES set forth!

Oh, and that 'You Aren't Bothered' ...yet that was repeated often and your diatribes just grew in earnest and numbers as well!

As I once asked Tommykins; 'please, please - pleaaaaaase' do hold your breath while waiting for my apology! 

I actually did apologise to you and sassy for mentioning your age.  Why do you only see the posts you want to see.
Oh and, I was right and you do need to go to specsavers - THE READING GLASSES SHOP - just in case you have forgotten.

And I have nothing to aplogise to you for; Imo I do think you are a fuckwit, and also add bully to that list, you are awful to lots of people and you're the biggest complaint we get, after Didge.

Now, you were WRONG about this thread. It's over. You look like a silly fool.

And.
Your bullying is going to stop.

No surprise there 
Bullying from a MOD - no apology for rule braking - no apology for repeating PM's being read in the MODERATION ROOM AGAIN
Gee, your just a whole little world of temper tantrums and hysteria and with the power of your position behind you to keep calling people your very own lovely little pet names!  
Classy and real mature!

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

THOSE questions have nothing to do with genuine discussions over what liberals and conservatives actually do believe in  !!!

Rather, they are a ridiculous mix of red herrings, nonsensical rhetoric, "straw man" arguments, bluster and outright bullshit..

Obviously composed by some uneducated, far-right stirrer in the conservative/Zionist/Tea party propaganda industry -- written for the sole purpose of attacking something that the author doesn't simply not like -- but doesn't even understand !

AS IS clearly demonstrated by his/her total ignorance of what the term "liberal" even means, and their mistaken use of the phrase "middle class" in their attempted diatribe..        

Absolutely agree with this.  The outright bullshit part comes from:

Hawkins wrote:"19) If you have good character, you should feel ashamed of taking food stamps, taking welfare, or being on a school lunch program."

'If you have good character...' = 'my opinion is...'  

Why should we care what your bullshit opinion is?  God, these alt-right assholes are narcissistic.

eddie wrote:I actually did apologise to you and sassy for mentioning your age.  Why do you only see the posts you want to see.
Oh and, I was right and you do need to go to specsavers - THE READING GLASSES SHOP - just in case you have forgotten.

And I have nothing to aplogise to you for; Imo I do think you are a fuckwit, and also add bully to that list, you are awful to lots of people and you're the biggest complaint we get, after Didge.

Now, you were WRONG about this thread. It's over. You look like a silly fool.

And.
Your bullying is going to stop.

I have to say Eddie, that is exactly what it felt like you were doing the other day.

4EVER2 wrote:No surprise there 
Bullying from a MOD - no apology for rule braking - no apology for repeating PM's being read in the MODERATION ROOM AGAIN
Gee, your just a whole little world of temper tantrums and hysteria and with the power of your position behind you to keep calling people your very own lovely little pet names!  
Classy and real mature!

Empty     vessels make the most noise.     You're like    a fucking    droning old wind    bag.  

4EVER2 wrote:

eddie wrote:Now I will wait for 4ever to apologise to me.

It isn't my fault that people look for the bad in all things.  

Re: Hypocrites are the worst kind of people
 by eddie on Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:05 am
I don't care what you think, you know you're a liar and a hypocrite and that's all I need to know.

And least we forget that epic vibrant choice of "'Hypocritical fucktards' take note: Here are some warning signs of THE HYPOCRITE:"

Re: David Icke on Michelle Obama - does he have a point?
 by eddie on Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:56 am

4EVER2 wrote:


  

Are you telling me you don't remember you, and I and sassy laughing about trumps hair and his face?????
You call him Cheeto-Jesus!
You two are too fucking old for forums if you can't remember something we laughed at a few weeks ago.
Or you're lying.
So which is it? Are you senile or a liar?

Would seem redundant to offer up an apology - when an apology isn't warranted and YOU'VE CLEARLY STATED {rather numerous times in your hysteria rants this past few days} THAT I AM A FUCKTARD - HYPOCRITE - SENILE - LIAR - TO OLD FOR FORUMS; and then you devoted an entire topic just about that specific issue for which you've never apologized to the entire membership for breaking the NEWEST RULES set forth!

Oh, and that 'You Aren't Bothered' ...yet that was repeated often and your diatribes just grew in earnest and numbers as well!

As I once asked Tommykins; 'please, please - pleaaaaaase' do hold your breath while waiting for my apology! 

Can we try to keep this thread on topic, please? I'm so tired of seeing half our threads turn into fights.

I suppose, expecting a "MOD" to behave both maturely and to formally apologize to the entire community for her rude/rule breaking behavior is setting my expectations WAY TO HIGH!

HoratioTarr wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:No surprise there 
Bullying from a MOD - no apology for rule braking - no apology for repeating PM's being read in the MODERATION ROOM AGAIN
Gee, your just a whole little world of temper tantrums and hysteria and with the power of your position behind you to keep calling people your very own lovely little pet names!  
Classy and real mature!

Empty     vessels make the most noise.     You're like    a fucking    droning old wind    bag.  

Hardly droning, droning is one tonal.

sassy wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Empty     vessels make the most noise.     You're like    a fucking    droning old wind    bag.  

Hardly droning, droning is one tonal.

Oh, I've had that 'Parachute packer' on ignore for quite some time;
Never any worth while commentary about any topic ...but has the resources to just drop in when ever her PACK is under duress!  
HT runs with a well established crowd of low bar thinkers!   But I must provide them with all sorts of amazing places to drop in, yet they never manage to post to the topic.

Anyone else have any replies to the OP? Or is Ben going to win by a landslide?

4EVER2 wrote:I suppose, expecting a "MOD" to behave both maturely and to formally apologize to the entire community for her rude/rule breaking behavior is setting my expectations WAY TO HIGH!

I asked you this once before 4Ever, but you called me a hyena or something instead of answering.
Serious question though....have you ever modded on a forum where you have also been a frequent poster?

If you have, you will know that when you post as a poster that's exactly what you are....same as everyone else, if you get into a row with someone as just an ordinary poster, you have the right to give back as good as you get.
You have the right to get irked, tell people off, start threads about hypocrites, in fact you have the right to post with the same freedom as everyone else.

Surely a fair minded person can see that if someone tells you to 'piss off' for eg...a mod (posting as a poster remember) has the same right to return the compliment without having mod status thrown in their face??

eddie wrote:Anyone else have any replies to the OP? Or is Ben going to win by a landslide?

Ben won....the post was too long and my attention span is too short.

Syl wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:I suppose, expecting a "MOD" to behave both maturely and to formally apologize to the entire community for her rude/rule breaking behavior is setting my expectations WAY TO HIGH!

I asked you this once before 4Ever, but you called me a hyena or something instead of answering.
Serious question though....have you ever modded on a forum where you have also been a frequent poster?

If you have, you will know that when you post as a poster that's exactly what you are....same as everyone else, if you get into a row with someone as just an ordinary poster, you have the right to give back as good as you get.  NO YOU DON'T - BS
You have the right to get irked, tell people off, start threads about hypocrites, in fact you have the right to post with the same freedom as everyone else.  UTTER BS

Surely a fair minded person can see  that if someone tells you to 'piss off' for eg...a mod (posting as a poster remember) has the same right to  return the compliment without having mod status thrown in their face??

Oh, you are quite humorous ...Syl!  Here you've arrived and 'Parachute' into a topic - nothing about the topic but your arrival is as always timed to perfection! 

A. as a current owner - current co-owner - current moderator; I have at all times followed the Community RULES ...to deviate from those rules then you {as moderator} breaking the very premise that the entire community is SUPPOSED TO BE REPRESENTING and it far worse {IMO} when the MODS/Owner break rules and chaos just follows!  News Rules, and same old behavior = same old BS!

B. had I thought or felt you warranted a reply {trusting you was a huge issue} and I've still have my doubts in that area ...I'm answering your direct question despite the fact it's derailing this topic that you can't be arsed to read or reply directly too

C. as always - you stand by little Eddie despite her going ROGUE and breaking many of the rules and that's as you always do and have done ...nothing I can change about that but hold you as I do the other 'Parachute Pack Club' that just DROP IN when the MOOD moves you to do so and leave your tell-tale snide remarks about 'ME' and nothing about the TOPIC! 
Because you'd be hard pressed to READ any of the specific lead in discussion to have a good grasp on the entire diatribe and what has brought this conversation to this point!

Syl wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:I suppose, expecting a "MOD" to behave both maturely and to formally apologize to the entire community for her rude/rule breaking behavior is setting my expectations WAY TO HIGH!

I asked you this once before 4Ever, but you called me a hyena or something instead of answering.
Serious question though....have you ever modded on a forum where you have also been a frequent poster?

If you have, you will know that when you post as a poster that's exactly what you are....same as everyone else, if you get into a row with someone as just an ordinary poster, you have the right to give back as good as you get.
You have the right to get irked, tell people off, start threads about hypocrites, in fact you have the right to post with the same freedom as everyone else.
,
Surely a fair minded person can see  that if someone tells you to 'piss off' for eg...a mod (posting as a poster remember) has the same right to  return the compliment without having mod status thrown in their face??

4Ever is a mod on another forum I post on.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:Anyone else have any replies to the OP? Or is Ben going to win by a landslide?

Ben won....the post was too long and my attention span is too short.

The problem I have debating conservatives is that I very often don't agree with the premises they build their arguments upon. Like:

"How long do you think we can support this massive welfare state?"

I'm like, "First, why do you describe it as 'massive' in the first place? It isn't."

Ben Reilly wrote:

Syl wrote:
Ben won....the post was too long and my attention span is too short.

The problem I have debating conservatives is that I very often don't agree with the premises they build their arguments upon. Like:

"How long do you think we can support this massive welfare state?"

I'm like, "First, why do you describe it as 'massive' in the first place? It isn't."

Considering that the very foundation that this entire thread was established upon another 'BLOGGER' with the most archaic POV and proven {as my listed quotes showed} to be nothing more then a heinous wind bag --- the entire discussion about '20 Questions No Liberal Could Answer' was just to bizarre to be realistic! 
A. the blogger has his own low bar-false opinion about the definition of what a Liberal is
B. the entire questionnaire was dated 2013
C. the man is a fruit cake and has little to offer in the way of decent facts let alone worthy content for adult discussion
D. as this has turned out - WTH   If anyone wants to know what our OPINIONS are about specific social issues, why don't they just ask without trying to confine us into a BOX with a LIBERAL LABEL? 

Not everyone gets my humour.

4EVER2 wrote:

Syl wrote:

I asked you this once before 4Ever, but you called me a hyena or something instead of answering.
Serious question though....have you ever modded on a forum where you have also been a frequent poster?

If you have, you will know that when you post as a poster that's exactly what you are....same as everyone else, if you get into a row with someone as just an ordinary poster, you have the right to give back as good as you get.  NO YOU DON'T - BS
You have the right to get irked, tell people off, start threads about hypocrites, in fact you have the right to post with the same freedom as everyone else.  UTTER BS

Surely a fair minded person can see  that if someone tells you to 'piss off' for eg...a mod (posting as a poster remember) has the same right to  return the compliment without having mod status thrown in their face??

Oh, you are quite humorous ...Syl!  Here you've arrived and 'Parachute' into a topic - nothing about the topic but your arrival is as always timed to perfection! 

A. as a current owner - current co-owner - current moderator; I have at all times followed the Community RULES ...to deviate from those rules then you {as moderator} breaking the very premise that the entire community is SUPPOSED TO BE REPRESENTING and it far worse {IMO} when the MODS/Owner break rules and chaos just follows!  News Rules, and same old behavior = same old BS!

B. had I thought or felt you warranted a reply {trusting you was a huge issue} and I've still have my doubts in that area ...I'm answering your direct question despite the fact it's derailing this topic that you can't be arsed to read or reply directly too

C. as always - you stand by little Eddie despite her going ROGUE and breaking many of the rules and that's as you always do and have done ...nothing I can change about that but hold you as I do the other 'Parachute Pack Club' that just DROP IN when the MOOD moves you to do so and leave your tell-tale snide remarks about 'ME' and nothing about the TOPIC! 
Because you'd be hard pressed to READ any of the specific lead in discussion to have a good grasp on the entire diatribe and what has brought this conversation to this point!

Well the only person who did answer the topic was Ben....so I am just parachuting into here the same as everyone else has...you included.

I don't always back Eddie or anyone else...I just post when something takes my interest.....just as everyone on a forum does....but obviously I expected the SNIDE and PARACHUTE comments from you because I pointed out something you don't agree with.... and I addressed my comments to you because you are in fact the one who is kicking the fuss up.

I did have a point though....I was mod/poster on a forum where I was expected (by some) to take abuse and never retaliate....now why should I? why should anyone? So a compromise was made and we had a section where mods could post in that section free of the mod shackle.

It's a pity you cant see anyones point of view but your own re abuse 4Ever.....maybe if you thought about it fairly instead of believing people are always attacking you, you would see I have a point.  

sassy wrote:

Syl wrote:

I asked you this once before 4Ever, but you called me a hyena or something instead of answering.
Serious question though....have you ever modded on a forum where you have also been a frequent poster?

If you have, you will know that when you post as a poster that's exactly what you are....same as everyone else, if you get into a row with someone as just an ordinary poster, you have the right to give back as good as you get.
You have the right to get irked, tell people off, start threads about hypocrites, in fact you have the right to post with the same freedom as everyone else.
,
Surely a fair minded person can see  that if someone tells you to 'piss off' for eg...a mod (posting as a poster remember) has the same right to  return the compliment without having mod status thrown in their face??

4Ever is a mod on another forum I post on.

And I'm sure she makes a good mod on that forum Sassy.
I am also sure (having read her posts for a few months) she doesn't sit back like a mute and let everyone talk to her like crap.

Syl wrote:

sassy wrote:

4Ever is a mod on another forum I post on.

And I'm sure she makes a good mod on that forum Sassy.
I am also sure (having read her posts for a few months) she doesn't sit back like a mute and let everyone talk to her like crap.

Quite right, but I NEVER GO OVER THE LIMITATIONS OF OUR VOTED ON RULES ...and that Syl is a huge - Mammoth difference between how I was taught & what our community operates; proper moderators have to behave above the hovel and how a few behave over here despite the very RULES and what they PREACH, is exactly what even Didge was ranting about!

But it's all subjective and I fully understand your slanted POV ...it's always skewed to back little Eddie, even when she's behaved horrendously!

4EVER2 wrote:

Syl wrote:

And I'm sure she makes a good mod on that forum Sassy.
I am also sure (having read her posts for a few months) she doesn't sit back like a mute and let everyone talk to her like crap.

Quite right, but I NEVER GO OVER THE LIMITATIONS OF OUR VOTED ON RULES ...and that Syl is a huge - Mammoth difference between how I was taught & what our community operates; proper moderators have to behave above the hovel and how a few behave over here despite the very RULES and what they PREACH, is exactly what even Didge was ranting about!

But it's all subjective and I fully understand your slanted POV ...it's always skewed to back little Eddie, even when she's behaved horrendously!

You provoke continuously 4Ever...I dont have to look far...why prefix her name with 'little'? pointless and childish provocation....do you put up with that on your forum?

I don't think my POV is slanted, I think in this instance yours is. I don't hold it against you though...to err is human.

Syl wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:
Quite right, but I NEVER GO OVER THE LIMITATIONS OF OUR VOTED ON RULES ...and that Syl is a huge - Mammoth difference between how I was taught & what our community operates; proper moderators have to behave above the hovel and how a few behave over here despite the very RULES and what they PREACH, is exactly what even Didge was ranting about!

But it's all subjective and I fully understand your slanted POV ...it's always skewed to back little Eddie, even when she's behaved horrendously!

You provoke continuously 4Ever...I dont have to look far...why prefix her name with 'little'? pointless and childish provocation....do you put up with that on your forum?

I don't think my POV is slanted, I think in this instance yours is. I don't hold it against you though...to err is human.

So you 'SAY' ...and as always you have your OPINION

And much like our very own rectum - 'we all have one' and as I'm quite well versed in working with and dealing with the immature - it's the best way of getting one's specific point across when a person in authority is behaving in such a 'FUCK-WIT' manner without getting into the gutter as so many do around here! 
Oh, you 'SAY' you never hold anything against me ...but you'll be the first to 'parachute' in and the 'first to  ' because that's just exactly how YOU OPERATE ...very sly but not quite so obvious, why almost coy!

BTW ...have you checked your tally sheet lately ...I'm quite sure that the little greenies   have been racking up from your greatly appreciative favorite moderator! 

4EVER2 wrote:

Syl wrote:

You provoke continuously 4Ever...I dont have to look far...why prefix her name with 'little'? pointless and childish provocation....do you put up with that on your forum?

I don't think my POV is slanted, I think in this instance yours is. I don't hold it against you though...to err is human.

So you 'SAY' ...and as always you have your OPINION

And much like our very own rectum - 'we all have one' and as I'm quite well versed in working with and dealing with the immature - it's the best way of getting one's specific point across when a person in authority is behaving in such a 'FUCK-WIT' manner without getting into the gutter as so many do around here! 
Oh, you 'SAY' you never hold anything against me ...but you'll be the first to 'parachute' in and the 'first to  ' because that's just exactly how YOU OPERATE ...very sly but not quite so obvious, why almost coy!

BTW ...have you checked your tally sheet lately ...I'm quite sure that the little greenies   have been racking up from your greatly appreciative favorite moderator! 

Aww...I thought they were from you 4Ever....I know secretly you like me.

I don't hold anything against you, unlike you I take the good comments with the bad comments, and I can take criticism if it's fair.
You can think of me what you like...sly, parachute jumper, hyena mob etc etc.....I know it's not true and deep down so do you.
You are like the friend or work colleague we have all had in the past....good fun and thoughtful as long as everything is going their way....PITA as soon as anyone says ONE WORD that they see as criticism against them.

Well, I've always wondered what your motivation was ...now it's clearer
I'd had my suspicions but there are just so many 'gamers' around here - 'pretenders' and 'wanna be'; it becomes hard to define the true nature humans from the almost but not quite REAL PEOPLE! 

4EVER2 wrote:Well, I've always wondered what your motivation was ...now it's clearer
I'd had my suspicions but there are just so many 'gamers' around here - 'pretenders' and 'wanna be'; it becomes hard to define the true nature humans from the almost but not quite REAL PEOPLE! 

My motivation is to post and enter threads that interest me...have a laugh and sometimes a bit of a moan....same as most I would have though.
I use my own name and my own pics (sometimes) I leave the pretence to others.
Hope that's clarified everything.....till the next time I say something you don't like anyway.

Can we get back on topic now dya think???

4EVER2 wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:
The problem I have debating conservatives is that I very often don't agree with the premises they build their arguments upon. Like:

"How long do you think we can support this massive welfare state?"

I'm like, "First, why do you describe it as 'massive' in the first place? It isn't."

Considering that the very foundation that this entire thread was established upon another 'BLOGGER' with the most archaic POV and proven {as my listed quotes showed} to be nothing more then a heinous wind bag --- the entire discussion about '20 Questions No Liberal Could Answer' was just to bizarre to be realistic! 
A. the blogger has his own low bar-false opinion about the definition of what a Liberal is
B. the entire questionnaire was dated 2013
C. the man is a fruit cake and has little to offer in the way of decent facts let alone worthy content for adult discussion
D. as this has turned out - WTH   If anyone wants to know what our OPINIONS are about specific social issues, why don't they just ask without trying to confine us into a BOX with a LIBERAL LABEL? 

By all means ..,since I'm a few posts way ahead of YOUR derailing (I've replied to the topic and with links and copied articles as well) 
I'll bear your walk on water opinion, in mind the next time I come under attack from another MOD - and their calling me a LIAR - SENILE - FUCKTARD HYPOCRITE - that shouldn't be posting here ... that you would just SUCK IT UP AND IGNORE THAT HENIOUS BEHAVIOUR    Cause that's how you roll and everyone should emulate your every posting methods

I saw this



and thought of you 4ever

Ah, and I saw this and thought of you Vic lol

Blimey....

she did THAT from all the way over the atlantic...she must have VERY long arms....

Nah, she didn't, just me and Google lol.

Or where you angling for a reply from 4Ever for any particular reason?

no...do I need a "reason"?

but I was amazed that she managed to stick her hand up and operate the ventrilloquist doll from such a distance.....