.

Don't call them "liberals".... Read on..

plautusplautus Member Posts: 135 ✭✭
Ladies and gentlemen,Bill Clinton knew the power of the "word." He knew that image and communication skills (i.e. "marketing") sell ideas much better than good, sound arguments.Case in point, VHS vs. BetaMAX. Everyone knows that BetaMAX was a better video, so why did VHS "win?" Marketing and the fact that the term "beta" means "second best" or "not yet ready" to most people. Sony discovered this through market studies much too late! (I.e. "beta" version of software)The dictionary definition of "liberal" offers insight. The examples given for word usage are "a liberal benefactor," "free from bigotry," "open to new ideas or progress," "broad minded," and so on. It all sounds so darn NICE!Are you getting the picture now??This is what Bill Clinton and company "imply" when he speaks, allegedly "from the heart." People NEED to think that other people care about them. ALL OF US.So STOP calling them "liberals." Call them what they are:"Socialists""Anti-individualists" "Pro-collectivsts" "Leninists/Trotskyites/Maoists"JUST DON'T CALL THEM "LIBERALS!"Thank you very much for your time.plautus

Comments

  • Judge DreadJudge Dread Member Posts: 2,372 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    socialism needs to be defined better...communism is not part of socialism .Socialism is the only good thing communist had apart from being brutalized ...similar to us having RIGHTS apart from being enslaved...SAME STUFF WITH A DIFFERENT FROSTING TOPPING !
    I judge Thee!, Not for what you are , but for what you say !
  • jazzjazz Member Posts: 83 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Now your talking!So many people are afraid to say thosewords, because the truth hurts. The libsare the exact opposite of freedom. Theywant to ban everything. I hate to say it,but there are some conservatives that goalong with the program. We need to get back what is rightfully ours, the AmericanConstitution!
  • XML RanchXML Ranch Member Posts: 2 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have spent most of my life being confused by political ideologies. As a result, I have had an ideological identity crisis to deal with. What ideology the anti-gun Axsis Group most closly resembles, in my opion, is pure unadultrated FASCISM. You know, the same kind of philosophy of Hitler and Mussolini. Firearms owners are going to have to get off their 2nd Amendment pedestals and recognize that not only the 2nd is under attack, but the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 9th ammendments are under attack as well. By the same rascals. Also, when you are smelling the coffee, think about the Fascist under-toe of it all. "We don't need guns, we live in an enlightened society." Rubbish!!! The first firearms laws on the books in American date the 1640. The primary reason for those laws was to limit ownership of firearms only to certain classes of people. Once we classify people, we start to categorize those on the bottom as less worthy, even less human. So, it bothers us less or not at all when those on the bottom are persecuted. That is, of course you are one of those who are being persecuted. Then it bothers the hell out of you. As it should each and every one of us. We gun owners need to step forward, acknowlege that we excercise our second ammendment rights. We need not wait to fend off attacks on this right, but to be on the offensive. Expose these people in the Axsis Group for what they are. Treasonous!
  • jazzjazz Member Posts: 83 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    AMEN TO THAT BROTHER!
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Calling them liberals, communists, or socialists makes you look angry and defensive. Demonizing the people won't win over hearts in the middle, which is where the battle needs to be won. A person can be liberal in many ways and still believe in constitutional freedoms. If you want to win, attack their logic, attack their numbers, attack their beliefs.
  • plautusplautus Member Posts: 135 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    to "thebutcher"i totally agree with you--however, my point is that by manipulation of the language and titles, the left-wing establishment has managed to make itself look like the "good guys" who are always on the "side" of the poor and "underprivileged" and everyone who is not a "liberal" is against the poor.further, i propose that this is partially perpetuated by the fact that the true meaning of the word "liberal" is a very positive, very generous sense -- i.e. "a liberal donor," or "he gave liberal compliments." etc.by refusing to call the left-wing establishment "liberals" (whether they are democrat or republican) you defeat part of their purpose.....and thus make it easier to fight their assertions on fairer ground.
  • FitzFitz Member Posts: 258 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Among the biggest problems we have politically in the U.S. is an unquestioning habit to solve all problems with more laws, and to bring government into all aspects of our lives. That is where Liberal's and Libertarian's (or Constitutionalists) opposition is most evident. The next time someone has a great idea for a new law, remind them that even U.S. tax code is three times the size of the bible. When they suggest more government, remind them of their last trip to the Motor Vehicles Dept/Division. No, no, no! Socialism is bad! I am not the government's child. It is MINE and requires a very narrow scope of liberty and occasional spankings both to keep it safe, and to remind it of its place. JudgeDread! What are you saying? "Socialism is the only good thing communist had apart from being brutalized ..."????
  • thebutcherthebutcher Member Posts: 374 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I hear what you are saying, and I think it is an important point. This battle is won in the middle and we all need to be careful of our rhetoric on a lot of different fronts. Good post.
  • NOTPARSNOTPARS Member Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    For Plautus: You said it and are correct. One thing I do (as the only conservative social studies teacher in my school district) is try to smoke them out. Many so called liberals use that label to hide behind. I did a study, well, actually I collected the studies of great men, demonstrating that fascism and socialism are the same. And, of course, they are. You should see the liberals howl when I point this out. It is very revealing. Now, the fact that socialism is the same as fascism does not bother me one bit. Why? Because I am neither a socialist nor a fascist. But, the liberal (leftist) gets very angry when one demonstrates or asserts that fascism and socialism are essentially the same...Why? Because they are socialists and don't want to fess up to the blood on their hands! From fascsim? no, more people have been butchered under socialist systems than fascist systems. This is not a defense of fascism, doom on both! The point is, liberals often disguise and hide their true agendas, philosophies, goals, and so forth. You have to smoke them out! One of my first clues was when a liberal teacher called me a nazi. What was I doing? Teaching government from the point of view of the Founding Fathers. And that made me a nazi?! Puleeze...I told her she had better check out old pictures of George Washington and John Adams for nazi armbands then. And while she was at it, better pay attention to old reruns of Leave It To Beaver, maybe they have nazi armbands hidden in their closet (oh yeah, a professor at the University of Missouri Kansas City told us Leave it To Beaver was a right wing plot to subjugate women and make them controlled robots like the Stepford Wives).Keep up the good work!
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Right on notpars.
Sign In or Register to comment.