Liberals Go To Great Lengths

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]ZEB wrote:
By the way vroom, just because someone “used” to be a republican does not mean that they can’t have changed into a liberal…It does happen…some people get dumb down as they get older…:slight_smile: smile buddy kidding with you…[/quote]

But the point is, where does it say he became a liberal? Where is this information besides in your head? According to the article he became an independent because the state republican party was not responsive enough to local concerns. I didn’t see anything about being liberal or even views on policy changing.

I’m done with this thread. I’m not getting sucked into the “liberal liberal liberal!! neo-con neo-con neo-con!!! well you can’t read!!” bullshit again. Have fun guys.

A formerly registered republican fucks with a cable box → “liberals” hate free speech = only on T-Nation politics forum

22

[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I’ve never encountered that perception before. As a matter of fact, I can name a high profile counter-example that relates to the main topic of this thread: Bill O’Reilly. He claims to be an independant but most people regard him as a conservative.[/quote]

It’s funny how most people do regard that pompous twit as conservative. I happen to believe he’s not–I happen to believe that he saw Fox News being created, and saw the success of Limbaugh on the radio, and decided he could jump in. If you’ve ever heard him be more unguarded–like on Imus or something, he’s really not all that conservative. But playing at it has certainly helped his bank account. He’s come a long way from his days as host of Inside Edition or whatever, huh?
I saw a show one day where Laura Ingraham was upset with him. He couldn’t stand before a true conservative.
Do you regard him as conservative, or were you just tossing him out for the heck of it?

23

[quote]Moriarty wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Moriarty wrote:
So, Zeb, are you going to comment on the fact that this was actually a registered republican, or are we hoping that no one is paying attention?

Hey Moriarty - are you going to ignore the fact that you have no reading comprehension skills? Or are you hoping no one notices?

Copied from the link above:
Formerly a registered Republican, even a precinct captain, Kimery became an independent in the 1990s…

I actually haven’t read the article, but I don’t see how what you’ve quoted here disputes my point, which was that Zeb assumed this person to be a liberal even though the article clearly states otherwise.

Care to comment Zeb?[/quote]
Moriarty, I thought your point was trying to say it was a registered republican when he wasn’t.
Why are you changing points now?
Or were you just confused the first post?

24

[quote]Al Shades wrote:
I’ve never encountered that perception before. As a matter of fact, I can name a high profile counter-example that relates to the main topic of this thread: Bill O’Reilly. He claims to be an independant but most people regard him as a conservative.[/quote]

I don’t think O’Reilly would make a do-hickie to block Fox.

There are not very many ‘Indies’ out there who would be this radical in their hatred of something. Most independents I know are either liberal, or conservative in their leanings. Not very many Switzerlands out there.

Since the left has made a point of ordaining Fox as a radical right-wing propaganda machine, those who hate Fox so much as to invent a Fox-blocker must agree.

I’d by one if it would work on the Lifetime Movie Channel.

25

Moriarity is right, this is just a very lame excuse for liberal bashing.

Too bad the dude in question isn’t faulting fox because it apparently leans right, but because of their policies, which he disagrees with. I guess if you disagree with anything conservative, including the way fox is run, you must de-facto be a liberal.

Strange how that works. To me, it points to some mighty thick lenses.

26

Well, I don’t know if an AP writer would ever brand a man a liberal unless he said it himself.

After all, that wouldn’t promote much of an agenda - even if he is now a flaming Marxist, isn’t it better ‘news’ if a former Republican, no matter how long ago, is mad at Republican propaganda machine FOX?

After all, why isn’t it relevant to the news story to mention his current political affiliation - why only his past affiliation? There’s no mention that his distaste for FOX was the reason he abandoned the Republican party - why add it to the story?

Bet I can guess.

Moreover, what I do know is that if I created a microchip that could block the New York Times because I thought they had a blatant bias and printed inaccurate news supporting that bias, the time between my annoucement of said microchip and the time that I would be labeled a Right-wing fanatic could be clocked with a stopwatch.

And it would be an obvious inference, and a fair one.

It’s not that big of a leap to call him a liberal, but if it turns out he is not a liberal, I think Zeb should send a card of apology to him for the insult.

27

I’ve invented a device to block all the chanels I don’t want to watch. It’s called the remote control.

Send me three easy payments of $19.99 and I will sell you one of your very own…

28

Sorry BB, I don’t watch the shopping channel either… :wink:

29

[quote]Moriarty wrote:
ZEB wrote:
By the way vroom, just because someone “used” to be a republican does not mean that they can’t have changed into a liberal…It does happen…some people get dumb down as they get older…:slight_smile: smile buddy kidding with you…

But the point is, where does it say he became a liberal? Where is this information besides in your head? According to the article he became an independent because the state republican party was not responsive enough to local concerns. I didn’t see anything about being liberal or even views on policy changing.

I’m done with this thread. I’m not getting sucked into the “liberal liberal liberal!! neo-con neo-con neo-con!!! well you can’t read!!” bullshit again. Have fun guys.

A formerly registered republican fucks with a cable box → “liberals” hate free speech = only on T-Nation politics forum
[/quote]

No vroom Moriarty is actually quite wrong!

Does one have to be a registered democrat to be assumed a liberal? In fact, I would wager that most registered democrats, especially in certain parts of the country are not at all liberal.

The assumption that the person is a “liberal” is based upon the fact that liberals hate FOX News, as it leans right. Just as CNN, CBS, NBC and ABC lean left.

If one leaves the republican party and does not register as a democrat, it is perhaps because the (majority) of democrats are not liberal enough for him. Hence he registers as an Independent,

I’m so sure that his political views are liberal that I will bet with Moriarty on this!

30

Zeb, you are pretty liberal yourself – liberal in your interpretation of what things mean when people say something.

I’m not agreeing with everything Moriarty is saying… I’m saying that this is simply a lame excuse for liberal bashing.

There is no evidence either way whether the guy in question is in fact liberal. The reason the press wrote an article at all (presumably) is because the guy certainly was republican.

We can theorize all we like, but in reality it is just conjecture based on how you yourself (the reader, any reader) feels. It doesn’t matter how sure you are either.

And yes, it is simply a silly gimmick! It isn’t censorship any more than the remote is censorship. There is really no story here at all. Certainly nothing substantive to support the premise of this entire thread.

Therefor, the entire thread is really just a silly excuse to bash liberals. Go for it. Bash away. It might surprise a few of you, but a lot of us don’t see the world in terms of “liberal” and “republican” or whatever other labels you want to use to divide everything.

Personally, I’m usually just arguing against silly comments… which has me being an “ultra liberal”, which I find somewhat amusing. Often, your comments (the collective your) show your own bias more so than the person you are slapping labels on.

You guys realize that right?

31

[quote]vroom wrote:
Zeb, you are pretty liberal yourself – liberal in your interpretation of what things mean when people say something.

Moriarity is right, this is just a very lame excuse for liberal bashing.

I’m not agreeing with everything Moriarty is saying… I’m saying that this is simply a lame excuse for liberal bashing.

There is no evidence either way whether the guy in question is in fact liberal. The reason the press wrote an article at all (presumably) is because the guy certainly was republican.

We can theorize all we like, but in reality it is just conjecture based on how you yourself (the reader, any reader) feels. It doesn’t matter how sure you are either.

And yes, it is simply a silly gimmick! It isn’t censorship any more than the remote is censorship. There is really no story here at all. Certainly nothing substantive to support the premise of this entire thread.

Therefor, the entire thread is really just a silly excuse to bash liberals. Go for it. Bash away. It might surprise a few of you, but a lot of us don’t see the world in terms of “liberal” and “republican” or whatever other labels you want to use to divide everything.

Personally, I’m usually just arguing against silly comments… which has me being an “ultra liberal”, which I find somewhat amusing. Often, your comments (the collective your) show your own bias more so than the person you are slapping labels on.

You guys realize that right?[/quote]\

First of all, you don’t have to admit you are a liberal, most liberals pretty much run from the label. You are no exception to this!

Secondly, it’s your conjecture that the man is not a liberal! Anyone who sells a product that blocks FOX News is probably a liberal, especially a former republican.

I am so sure of this I will bet you that if you or I made a phone call to this gentleman and asked him a few questions relative to his political beliefs he would be seen as liberal on all or most of them.

As far as this thread being about bashing liberals, it’s not. I thought it was a funny story about someone who was fed up with FOX News. Since all of YOU liberals attack FOX on this forum I thought you would get a kick out of it. arguing about if the guy is liberal or not is stupid. He obviously has an agenda and it’s liberal my friend, just like you!

32

[quote]vroom wrote:
Personally, I’m usually just arguing against silly comments… which has me being an “ultra liberal”, which I find somewhat amusing. Often, your comments (the collective your) show your own bias more so than the person you are slapping labels on.

You guys realize that right?[/quote]

Except that in circumstances that don’t require your argument against labels, you’re one of the first people in to label others.
All we are is evil right wingers picking on the poor little leftys.
It’s funny how liberals argue v. conservatives.
Vroom, I like you, you’re a good guy, but you have an agenda, just like the rest of us. My question to you is: are you not admitting it to yourself or just trying to hide it from us?

33

Joe, the interesting thing is, my agenda is not political. Imagine that! I’m not pushing left vs right, but that is what people keep thinking I’m trying to do, because that is all they can see. It’s kinda nifty.

Zeb, let’s look at this…

That is not my conjecture at all. I’m saying we do not have the information to know. Just because most people arguing against fox in here are “liberal” in your eyes, does not in fact equate to the fact that there aren’t “republicans” that can’t stand fox news.

We don’t know… though you “believe”. Good for you. It’s your belief. I’m not saying it is right or wrong. I’m just saying I haven’t jumped to the same conclusion you have.

If you had titled the thread… some idiots go to extreme lengths… we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation.

Radical righties, no need to take offense, I’m not saying you are wrong. I really don’t have any idea. Hell, the guy could be a card carrying liberal for all I know.

What I am saying is that the slant of your own viewpoint makes it difficult for you to accept other viewpoints, because they (viewpoints) are “polarized” by your own “lenses”.

Heh, you guys are in danger of running away from this “label” as much as I “run” from being a liberal. Anyway, you might notice that from time to time I embrace the “ultra liberal” label, especially because I don’t think it fits.

It’s funny to me!

34

The funniest part for me is when my commie friend actually shuts up once and listens to me and finds out we actually share many of the same beliefs.

I don’t know why ZEB titled it the way he did, except that it stands to reason the guy’s a lib or he wouldn’t have said he was an independent.

I really don’t care.

Yep, the guy’s an idiot.
And you know what? If he’d figured out some way to block CNN–no news story.

On a related subject, anyone see the Simpson’s last night. Now that was funny shit!
(if you saw it, you know the tie in…)

35

So, I’m more than a little curious, what does an independent call him or her self? Are there no such things as independents?

Independents go to great lengths… :stuck_out_tongue:

36

[quote]Joe Weider wrote:

All we are is evil right wingers picking on the poor little leftys.
It’s funny how liberals argue v. conservatives.

[/quote]

liberals argue v. conservatives…
lets see… facts vs. name calling, but your right it can be funny, that’s why I love Hannity, never has anybody been on the wrong side of issues so often, but he just shouts his way through reality every night. And Bill who just makes stuff up, and then attacks, no I just couldn’t live without FOX.

37

Vroom, 100meters, you guys kick ass! I’m glad there are guys like you on the forum.Well my chicken breasts are done and ready for consumption. I’m out.

38

[quote]100meters wrote:
Joe Weider wrote:

All we are is evil right wingers picking on the poor little leftys.
It’s funny how liberals argue v. conservatives.

liberals argue v. conservatives…
lets see… facts vs. name calling, but your right it can be funny, that’s why I love Hannity, never has anybody been on the wrong side of issues so often, but he just shouts his way through reality every night. And Bill who just makes stuff up, and then attacks, no I just couldn’t live without FOX.

[/quote]

Hannity’s okay…I don’t listen to his radio show or watch Hannity and Pussy too often.
When you say Bill I assume you meant Bill O’Leilly, Mr. “hey, look, I think there’s something to this conservative schtick and I’m gonna use it to make a million dollars”. I truly despise him, he’s one of the biggest bullshitters out there.
Bigger maybe than Nancy Pelosi!

39

[quote]100meters wrote:
Joe Weider wrote:

All we are is evil right wingers picking on the poor little leftys.
It’s funny how liberals argue v. conservatives.

liberals argue v. conservatives…
lets see… facts vs. name calling,[/quote]

Usually–even in this forum, and with my friend The Commie I don’t get facts. Usually The Commie will say things like “this may sound condescending…but…”–actually he sounds much like vroom.
And of course there’re guys like Corzine who say Cheney=Hussein–now there’s a nice debate with no name calling, huh?
And even here–every time you–YOU 100 Meters–you disagree with something I’ve said or posted, even if it may well be fact, you accuse me of being a kook etc.
Meanwhile, the worst I accuse you of is being a stinkin lib .

40

[quote]vroom wrote:
So, I’m more than a little curious, what does an independent call him or her self? Are there no such things as independents?

Independents go to great lengths… :p[/quote]

vroom, in my honest opnion, there are no true Independents.
You almost never hear of someone having been a lib or even just a democrat and then becoming an independent.
It’s always associated with someone who was a republican and sold out his party.
(Think Jumpin Jim Jeffords, or even John McCain).