I'm A Liberal, Ask Me Anything

Meanwhile libs cannot answer simple questions.

 

Tighty whities or breezy briefs?

 

Libs aren't the ones who need their own alt-reality media bubble where things like science, facts, history, and logic are replaced by cult indoctrination.

 

Left enough to justify being left-out of serious debate.
Is what.

 

What on earth did Leftists ever do before the recent invention
of Alt-Right
Oh I Know ... Mommie.I know.
Far-Right. Or Extreme Right.
Yes Billie,that about sums up the left.

 

There is no "alt-right". The hate and ignorance that Trump or Brietbart spew is totally mainstream in the republican base. Trump just didn't try to hide it.

 

You and lefties are stale Fortune cookies at best.
Bumper sticker logic and smear agenda's galore.
Real Americans,The heartland and Americana cannot stand
yer guts.The MSM approval is on par with Politicians.
Like consistently below 10% approval.
If that was the batting average {.100 } of a major league baseball player,
they would be made bat boys like overnight.

 

LOL! It is the libs who ignore things like biology in lieu of their sacred ideology and myths.

 

Although I've no doubt you actually believe this, I think you've demonstrated in your own thread that you are doing a lot more dodging and snarking than providing reams of data.

 

What's your take on Antifa and Moldylocks?

 

The argument should be about what wage level can sustain a worker at a desired level of human dignity and lifestyle. It will vary in every economy. A national minimum should cover the basic necessities for a person working full time in an average of economies within the state. Individual states can raise the level but cannot go below it. All that is being done is to provide a worker with enough money so they can live and prosper. Defining that level is a subjective decision that is also a moral statement about our nation and our people. As it moves along an axis, it defines who we are and what we care about. If all we care about is profit, it will be a line that slopes downwards. If we care about people, it will slope upwards.

 

Well that was a classy post, Foolardi.

"YOUR're"...huh???

And an old biddy who runs a boarding house where I supposedly stay.

Okay.

 

Before a person jumps on a forum and declares HE is the voice of liberals and claims he can win any debate, it irrational to not first try to figure out what being a "liberal" means in a way he can articulate. Since he appears incapable of doing so, he loses every debate before he begins.

Clearly, the OP is notably uneducated. Nothing wrong with that, but it is to a degree that he does not even understand to core concept of a "debate."

Fundamental rule of debate:

1. First, you establish YOUR premises. It is called being in the affirmative or stating your case (ie being a liberal is superior). It this instance,those first premises would be what he claims being a liberal is that he challenges you to debate him over. Only after he does so can there even be a debate by someone in disagreement, or in the negative. If no affirmative is presented, he simply lost without anyone saying a word.

He that absolute refuses to even attempt state a case on behalf of being a liberal is absurd from a debate perspective. There is nothing to debate because he has presented nothing, other than starting a thread the essence of which is "Debate me - I don't know who or what I am, believe or support - but I am right about everything." In short, this is just an ego-mania attention-whoring thread from a "debate" perspective.

By his lack of initial premises and definition, he is not a liberal, he is a nothing.

 

A 6-year-old would win a debate with the OPer "BobbySerious."

It goes like this:

OPer: "I am a liberal. Debate me. I have never lost a debate."

6-year-old: "What is a liberal?"

OPer: "I don't know what a liberal is."

6-year-old wins the debate.

 

Jake, you are beginning to sound like a six-year older yourself now.

You've made your point. You think Bobby cannot define "liberal."

When a person like you gets into the "define" crap...one can be pretty sure YOU are the one losing.

I've seen posts of yours that deal with the "liberal" word quite adequately...and no "definition" of it was needed.

None is actually needed now...not for a thread like this one.

Why not move on? f you just keep kicking the sand...everyone gets sand in the eyes.

 

Most liberals call themselves that because some conservative labeled them a liberal due to a disagreement on some foundational conservative dogma that was rejected hence the immediate response of "liberal, or statist or marxist or socialist" by the conservative. I can define liberal for all you conservatives. It is roughly that area of thought, that well of support, that body of hope, reason and fairness that is in direct opposition to the conservative equivalent. Since today's conservative believes they support something timeless, something principled and moral, it is astounding to those of us who reject their claims that none of what they consider bedrock principles is ever actually achieved, supported or passed by their leaders.

 

IT’S ALL ABOUT THE VIRTUE-SIGNALLING: Gentry Liberalism in San Francisco.

Local minimum wage hikes cause restaurants to leave or shut down and deter new ones from entering, according to a new Harvard Business School study of the San Francisco Bay Area restaurant industry that contradicts the orthodox liberal view that steeply raising the cost of unskilled labor will not affect jobs or hiring.

More interesting, though, are the study’s findings about which restaurants are forced to leave by the higher wage floors. The authors compared rates of departure of restaurants across different Yelp ratings, and found that the policy hit low and mid-quality restaurants much harder than top-tier restaurants. “Our point estimates suggest that a $1 increase in the minimum wage leads to an approximate 14 percent increase in the likelihood of exit for the median 3.5-star restaurant but the impact falls to zero for five-star restaurants.”

While a restaurant’s Yelp rating doesn’t correlate directly with its price range, this differential effect suggests that it’s easier for rich people to ignore the deleterious effects of minimum wage hikes. Virtually all of the most expensive restaurants in San Francisco have four or more stars; the city’s business and professional elite are unlikely to see many of their favorite high-end destinations pushed out of the city. Poor or middle-income workers are less likely to have the luxury of only frequenting top-rated establishments, not to mention that they are more likely to work at the restaurants that the hikes put out of business.

Why are California liberals so heartless and cruel?

 

I just wanted to repeat this. You said it beautifully, Woolley.

 

What's the deal with liberals love affair with Islam?

They hate what you support. Is it really just because they are the enemy of your enemy?

 

actually, it is conservatives who love Islam

 

No, we love oil. If it was buddhists sitting on an ocean of oil bush would be kissing the dahli lama there instead.

 

correction: the term "liberal" is used by conservatives and by fake liberals


the proper term is "progressives" which comes from a movement created by Republicans in the early 1900s

 

That movement is long gone. The proper term is leftist.

 

And, like most liberals, when you cannot support your position in a conversation with a conservative, you run away.

Something you did not even try to do, in face of links and data put to you...

Says he who declared himself victorious because someone refused to support a position he did not take and had nothing to do with the position YOU took, or the questions asked about your position.

Clearly, your characterization of conservatives is nothing but petulant projection.

 

To be honest, you are correct in that most of us now consider any debate with any conservative to be pointless. That is the key lesson these blogs have taught anyone trying to sway conservatives using facts, links, history and reality. It is simply impossible. I consider it to be like Dawkins trying to show proof of evolution to that fundie who said proof of God is that a banana is shaped perfectly for your hand. I have done this long enough to understand that the task is Sissyphean in nature, the rock keeps rolling back down the hill.