The debate "Liberals are Hypocrites" was started by
November 26, 2016, 6:25 pm.
22 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 24 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Yanksxx21 posted 24 arguments, dalton7532 posted 2 arguments, Ethan8336 posted 1 argument, RogueAmerican posted 14 arguments to the agreers part.
PoliticsAsUsual posted 45 arguments, historybuff posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Yanksxx21, dalton7532, Ethan8336, harshita, RogueAmerican, Matthew_Daniel, Rajat, thereal, redeemed, shuhel_2005, LeftoverEye70, Your_dad and 10 visitors agree.
historybuff, allyssa, roasting4days, LuizMouraBR, PoliticsAsUsual, WolfiesMom and 18 visitors disagree.
so what makes something fundamental? what is the difference between rights and privileges aside from the distinction we assign it.
Fundamental in need not guarantee.
and what would qualify as that?
like I said, I'd love for them to be fundamental, but that would be to ignore history and reality.
That isnt what Id call a right. They are far more fundamental. More in lines with a requirement.
they are a victory, one that can be undone.
the words rights and privileges have no meaning, they depend on the government we establish and the priorities we fight for.
if these rights are God given (the only way I can see them as qualifying as unalienable) then how is it that man so easily took them away?
one can easily make the case that health is a right up there with the pursuit of happiness. in fact the two are tied to each other. but health is not a right in our Constitution because it was not something they could guarantee 200 years ago. we can add or remove rights at whim of we (collectively choose to)
freedom of speech was a privilege until not too long ago, now it's a right. we make the distinction. it is not set in stone.
So are they a privilege?
i would like to say yes, but unfortunately the answer is a definitive no. these rights did not exist only 300 years ago and may cease to exist in the future if we fail to protect them.
Do you believe rights are inalienable.
no 2 different things are perfectly equal. you can absolutely put more value on some rights rather then others.
I would not want to sit in jail awaiting trial forever, but I can say with certainty that the right to vote is far more important than a right to a speedy trial.
once again, without the right to vote our nation is no longer representative of the people, and all our other rights are in jeopardy. with the right to vote we can secure or reestablish any of the other votes. it's not even close.
you keep repeating that you can't compare rights, yet you've provided no reasons to back that up aside from restating it again and again.
As does a personal defense against infringement of those rights. We can't place rights above others.
I do not "designate" any right above others, but I am entitled to my opinions and to make arguments in their defense. the rights are all important, but without voting it is, as I already stated, no longer a democracy or representative republic, therefore no longer America as the founders envisioned it. voting has quite a unique significance don't you think?
From my point of view, all rights are equally preserved.
I dont understand where you derived the ability to designate rights superior to others.
excellent straw man. I said no such thing. please address the arguments without misdirection.
Trump was tweeting about voter fraud after he won.
So the second amendment isnt a right.
the right to participate in the government is far more important than the 2nd ammendment. even if the 2nd is in the consitution, without voting this is no longer a democracy or a representative republic. it is no longer the United states.
voting should be a privilege only of citizenship, not a certain race, class, or location.
The second amendment is a guaranteed right. Voter IDs make it a privilege of race and location.
like I said, insignificant fraud vs significant voter obstruction. the damage of guns in criminal hands is not insignificant. had there been rampant voter fraud stronger voter id laws would be warranted even with some damage, but that isn't the case.
although under no circumstances should iy be coupled with moves to make ids harder to get. you seemed to have gladly danced around that malicious and undemocratic aspect.
Are you concerned with the racist policy of requiring background checks to buy a gun. They require ID.
I didnt even reference his acceptance of winning. I frankly didnt care what eother candidate did. I found it ironic that the party playing up Trumps apprehension to accept defeat was apprehensive themselves and endorsed a scam recount effort.
No conjecture, observation. Trump said he would accept the results if he won and this was acceptable. Republicans protested Obama's victories. Now you cry fowl that others aren't accepting the results. Explain how this is not hypocrisy.
The problem you are going to run into is that the president elect doesn't want to investigate the legitimacy of the election. He doesn't care that a foreign power interfered because he won.
removing an insignificant practically nonexistent voter fraud is not justified if it means significant sections of the citizenry cannot vote.
especially when voter Id laws seem to go hand in hand with closing dmvs in poorer counties... seriously?
Where did that conjecture come from. If there is voter fraud, it should be prevented amd removed to the fullest extent.
So as long as you win you don't care, but if you lose it is all voter fraud and criminal actions? That sounds rather hypocritical.
Obama care has helped me get insurance while I'm unemployed. There are some negative effects of Obamacare from Congress not Obama.
Yeah but the issue was created by the left. The right could not care less otherwise.
If I remember correctly, Trump said he would accept if Clinton is the winner. He said we will see.
yes, total number of regulations is not important. were they good? or were they bad? name some bad ones! or maybe even 1!
+ this is after the Bush years, which were years of massive deregulation and lead to the whole crisis. I bet you 100 bux half of those "new" regulations were just him reinstating what bush undid.
right on with the small business over big business message. it is appauling.
but by deregulating all businesses, your not doing anything to level the playing field. perhaps just making small business exceptions or grace periods, but not repeal!
what about the good part of regulation? why do you think regulations are passed?
trump? out of context? 0...
give me an example.
"NO Obama has not had the fastest recovery and is quite the God damn opposite. He has had the slowest economic recovery in the history of the United States"
if you would read, I said the fastest recovery of any developed nation, meaning from this recession. yes we've had better recoveries like when FDR went full blown socialism. that was the biggest. but I was comparing his performance to other nations in this same crisis, not to a different time with a different situation! we are #1 in the now, not history.
and let's not forget when he took office we were in free fall! what about the jobs he stopped us from losing? your counting from 0 as if he came into a stable economy when we were heading deep into the negative! even FDR came to office well into the depression, not during the free fall trying to catch and hold on to what we can.
Your Big business is flourishing at the cost of small business and startups, and it's honselty appaling.
Obama is responsible for six of the top seven all time total number of regulations and restrictions, and added over 79000 to the number of regualtions. These all have a purpose to crush small business such as independent health care providers, community banks, manufacturers and service providers. These give large corporation's an edge as they can afford the lawyers to be compliant with the law. The Democrats say they are for jobs, however at the federal level they have some nothing but destroyed them
You know how many times Trump has been taken out of context? But no she wanted to continue Obama's policies and kill the coal industry..I'm sorry I don't feel coal miners excell nor want to Build solar panels..
NO Obama has not had the fastest recovery and is quite the God damn opposite. He has had the slowest economic recovery in the history of the United States..I already explained this and have factual evidence, if your not going to read the posts or don't have the mental capacity to grasp thrm, don't post anything..
like I said. Obama got pushed around by Congress. he put his political capital into the wrong fights and should have concentrated more on the economy.
Hillary had a specific agenda to rebuild coal country. she said "coal is dead, but we will bring renewable energy jobs to coal country and not leave anyone behind."
the next morning right wing news put "Hillary says coal is dead" all over every headline and cut the rest of her sentence out conveniently.
the loss of jobs happened before obama. it was the recession, it was in full swing when he came into office. and the fastest recovery in the developed world is not "slow and steady" sorry if it wasn't fast enough to your liking but much of the world collapsed even further and suffered far more. your ignoring reality.
what regulations are choking business? corporate profits are at record highs, businesses are doing fine under obama.
which regulations do you think are hurting our economy? can you name any?
Coal use dropped because of the strain of regulations put on the Coal industry.... do you think this has no effect?
Now even if what you are saying was the ENTIRE reason americans lost jobs, it's up to the president to find jobs for these displaced workers, yet all he's done is let their resentment towards him increase by pretending that it's not an issue. My phones going die continue this later lad
coal use dropped because there are tons of cheaper alternatives.... do you think that would have no effect?
I agree with the thought process Yanks has given. I see it all the time
So i'm sorry slow and steady does not win the race, the amount of workers wanting a job shot up to 10 million in the terrible years of Obama, and the median amount of time of unemployment is at an all time high of 12 weeks. SO as I said before and I will repeat it if necessary, people are tired of losing their jobs to Regulations, losing their small businesses to regulations, going bankrupt...This election sparked a new hope that this country desperately needed and broke through the constant lies and promises not kept by Democrats, they are tired of not treated fairly, but most of all not being HEARD. Trump noticed this, and that's why they rejected another term of Obama, they want their lives and their JOBS BACK, these blue collar working americans will no longer be silenced, and its about time.
coal is stupid. eventually u'll run out. we need to look more into other options
It is Obama's fault as he stated that he was going to bankrupt the Coal Industry, and this is evident with the amount of Regulations that he'd put through Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency and in doing so put millions of workers without a job. Since he had taken office he started a full out war on the use of coal, just look at the numbers since 2008 the percentile of the use of coal fell by 29%. Now you can't even tell me that this has benefited us as he's created ZERO jobs to make up for the loss of the coal workers and miners. You Liberals can hang on to the fact that he has created over 14 million jobs to which he has I will admit, yet however this is overly taken out of context and is not shared from the Democrats and Obama Administration. This is from an eight year period and the amount of able aged working population grew over 16 million in those eight years, so he'd lost ground and set the record for the most failed and pathetic attempt at an economic recovery in history. So you please do go for your jobs wrecking champion :D!
yup. cause you will. natural gas is knocking it out and renewable are getting ready to finish them both off. Obama wasn't lying.
What was it? Something like Im not saying you cant go into coal. Just that you'll go bankrupt?
technically, Obama policies are forces outside of their control.
but yeah, totally Obama. nothing to do with labor being 2 dollars a week elsewhere. nothing to do with competing technologies like the super cheap natural gas or long term benefits of renewables... all obama.
I know it's always easier to just point fingers instead of accepting reality, but I do love how you include so many specific details instead of making just wild accusations without naming a single policy or data point :D
No forces are not out of their control , it's the Obama policies that put them out of work in the first place, and that's why we've have seen such a large flp in the rust belt states
who exactly isn't contributing to society? the poor people in the rust belt and coal country who are unemployed because of forces outside their control? woe is us for allowing them to see a doctor... you do realize these things cost us a lot more if we don't treat them now right?
unlike your short sighted self, trump and the advisors who understand complex economics and long term consequences have decided that it is best to keep these provisions. so I guess you think everyone, Democrats and Republicans are all idiots compared to the genius that is yanks.
Your right it does give people acsess to health insurance, by taking it from the people that actually work and contribute something to society.
your right, they aren't affordable. and the dems said that too, however, if you weren't given corporate insurance, there's a chance you would not have ANY insurance, and many good people who saved for retirement had everything wiped out because they didn't have insurance.
and if you had a preexisting condition, you were completely f***ed and soon to be bankrupt and on welfare. Obama care fixed all that. not even trump wants to repeal those parts of Obamacare. your f***ing welcome you ungrateful shits.
yes single payer would have been much better, but for every bump you point out in democratic policy, I can show you a Republican roadblock that caused it.
These lost jobs and arnt affordable despite what they said, Democrats lie again!
Obama care caused the first ever slow down in the rise of medical costs.
Long term issues? Laughable and Hypocritical, take a look at the effects of Obama Care and NAFTA, the Democratic staples to all will need to be reformed as they have failed in epic proportions
Reagan faced an economic collapse on an international level and an economic death spiral? lol.
also, the long term effects of Reaganomics on poverty were not that good.
they tried. coal is dying from cheaper natural gas, and increasingly cheap renewables. the whole plan was to build renewable plants in coal country and rust belt to bring you jobs, while pushing for education so your children don't have to compete with 3rd world countries for scraps.
yall are just idiots looking for a quick fix, hungry for your old jobs and eager for a president to bring back your old glory of manufacturing.
guess what. manufacturing never left. we still make just as much shit, and soon all manufacturing will be returning. the problem isn't the sector, it's the jobs, and they are never coming back. you'll get factories full of robots in a few years regardless who won the elections.
yall just f***ed yourselves. round of applause.
and I know you don't like what I'm saying and just gonna rebutt it with an personal attack that has 0 substance. but the facts don't lie. piece of advice, invest in the dow Jones, cause aside from that you will have 0 income coming your way, maybe some 4 dollar an hour busy work if anything.
don't tell me he fixed the economy, Regan faced much worse yet created over 19 million jobs, brought unemployment from 19% to 9% and lead a resurgence in the economy and let the bull loose, America would take his loose cannon productive thinking any day in comparison to your controlled unproductive thinking
if they really gave a damn for us they would've stood up for us
Now you can claim what democrats goals are productive, yet they have contributed nothing in the last eight years, and constantly have ignored the plights of a stronger economy and create jobs, Obama has fought for TPP, and has surpassed even Bush in government spending yet has acomplished nothing and only lead to his bills and deals requiring reform. This is why the blue collar states that have been forgotten rejected Obama and his possible third term, this is why his approval rating dropped to 44%, the modern issues that we face are not going to be fixed by the failed, and embarrassed Democratic Party
and that must be your last ditch attempt. heck when logic fails, go personal. it's the alt right motto. lol.
I love how you called me arrogant when you started your arguments with generalizations and insults. you mad when others start treating you like that? if your such a sensitive sissy then don't start throwing punches you can't take.
Your as arrogant as your are stupid
yeah I still see a ton of closed stores and extremely poor people so not exactly out of it. can u guess who they said did it?
oh sorry i meant to say that you cant give the credit of obama to the whole democrat party.
I didn't blame the Republicans for nixon. I never mentioned nixon. please don't make me repeat this again.
"And for being a politically correct liberal don't use retard, it could "OFFEND" someone....."
the only one dictating speech here is you. and sorry if you felt offended but I was at a loss for a better word to describe your claims.
This whole idea that all liberals are are obsessed with political correctness just shows how ignorant you are. yes many people who care about offending people and about the social welfare and rights of disenfranchised groups do gather under the progressive banner. as opposed to the hate groups that gather under your banner.
just like the hate groups that openly support your party do not mean every Republican is a racist, the bleeding heart liberals are just one group and do not represent all Democrats, and your inability to see this similarity shows how retarded you really are.
btw, I'll take the social justice warriors over the supremacist hate groups any day. you basket of deplorables.
oh no buddy. Just look. i mean obama's a single man. He might be great. But that doesnt mean the whole Democrat Party is a mature party. its just like blaming the whole republican party for nixon.
you specifically asked me to defend obama... I did. now your moving the goal post.
blue ray, when did I even mention nixon? was the Nixon debacle an economic disaster? what are you talking about?
@yanks. does the ceo of a big bank personally handle the security of a branch? or does he have more important things to do? did the request for more security even reach Hillary's desk? let me guess, you have no idea. thought so.
your blaming of nafta on job losses is also ignorant. you morons see an imported iPhone and think all 600 dollars go to where it was manufactured when in reality most of the $$$ is in the technology goes to apple, a us based company. only the manufacturing is done in mexico, you guys are fighting for dumbest low wage jobs like dogs fighting over leftovers whereas the Democrats have long been trying to improve education so we can attract actually useful jobs.
you want to know the difference between assembly line manufacturing work and burger flipping service work? service work you have to deal with customers whereas a monkey can work the assembly line lol. and guess what manufacturing is coming back, with or without trump. but they aren't bringing any jobs with it. so keep fighting over scraps at the bottom of the barrel repubs. dems have been pushing for expanding education so that we can continue to be world leaders, not bottom feeders.
so you are blaming the republicans because of Richard Nixon? He was the worst US prez.
yes he's only one democrat. I need a proper ratio that democrats are better.
fastest recovery from the global recession of any other developed nation. need any other proof?
prove yourself. Was obama better?
no. I'm not saying anything about people. any party can have a corrupt or greedy representative. I do think democratic policies are VASTLY superior, obviously not all, but in general they have proven better repeatedly.
you are saying that republucans are bad than democrats?
unlike what many of you Republicans (and I mean specifically the majority of the ones here on this app, not necessarily all in the nation, but literally YOU) I didn't generalize and say all Republicans always f*** it up, I said they f***ed up twice big league, and that is 100% true. sorry if thats inconvenient.
how am I intellectually dishonest? you didn't negate a single thing I said and you didn't even bother looking what it was I was responding to! you are the one being intellectually dishonest.
if you would have had the intellectual desire to actually see what I was responding to, it was yanks spectacularly ignorant claim that Democrats always screw it up and Republicans always have to fix it.... I never said no Democrat ever did bad, but I did point out 2 instances in which Republicans took us into the 2 BIGGEST ECONOMIC DISASTERS IN OUR NATIONS HISTORY. and Democrats got us out. is any part of that wrong? no.
your blind assumption and refusal to read properly is what was intellectually dishonest.
Sadly Yellen has been nursing an egg to keep numbers up.
You are very bad at recalling American history. Reagan helped fixed what Jimmy Carter did, domestic and foreign? The Bush era was a mess, and it was everyone's fault, not just Bush. Bill Clinton's NAFTA had terrible long term effects and now we have Trump to fix it and Obama's economy is just exploding with problems only helped by NAFTA. We have Trump to fix that too. You are very naive and intellectually dishonest.
And for being a politically correct liberal don't use retard, it could "OFFEND" someone.....
Now the Democratic Party pushes its liberal agenda of supporting gays and allowing equal opportunity for women. Now how the hell is it not hypocritical for the Democrats to accept donations from Saudi Arabia who do strongly are against this thinking, I believe that's simply disgusting.
No the claims against Hillary Clinton are not laughable, And that's why she did not become president, the people that were most affected by her administration and the continuation of Obama's polices rejected her corruption, lies, and ridiculous policies. Now what were they rejecting, well it dosent take an idiot to see.. She DID kill those brave Americans in Bengazi as their is proof of her ignoring their requests to improve security, her administration took jobs away from our country through NAFTA and in the long term contributed to the recession, Obama also performed the biggest fail bounce back of the economy in history, we've given a terrorist nation nuclear capabilities, there is plenty of evidence proving pay to play, she threatend national security through a private server and is hypocritical to say no countries hacked it while she was so quick to blame Russia for hacking. The country rejected her and Obama and so please do go on in your rant of to how these are laughable.
and how the hell does accepting money FROM Saudi Arabia support those abuses? they aren't giving money to Saudi arabia!
the claims against hillary, aside from the email scandal, are all laughably retarded.
I'm not comparing you to anything. I said hate groups are among you. I never said the right are hatemongers, but it's politics do attract such types. and I feel that is something noteworthy.
unlike your statement that all liberals are hypocrites. If you can't understand the difference, then that is the idiocy.
as for Hillary. it's been shown repeatedly that the Bengazi thing had nothing to do with her. just more tabloid bullshit.
and as for bushes and liberals. this glut has been around for decades. through right wing and left wing administrations. just cause you guys elected a loose cannon maverick that hasn't done shit yet doesn't mean your party gets to forget it's equally corrupt history.
let's not forget republican administrations have steered us into both the great depression and recession. and Democrats got us out both times. so that point is imaginary.
And you want to compare us to hateful groups and oppresive nations? It's your party's candidate that accepted donations from Saudi Arabia, to which opress women and kill gays. So if your party really stood up for these people and their social plights you wouldn't of accepted them, god damn Hypocrits.
The left focuses on issues that no one gives a shit, and in no way will benifet the country, and after time and time again as I said screwup and leave someone else to fix what they created...
Your an absolute idiot and I hope you know that, Hillary Clinton is a corrupt liar to whom also claimed the lives of Americans..And go ahead and compare our entire party towards the bushs, even we recognize that they were crap as Jeb didn't get any where. Republicans have always put America and it's people first just look at JFK, Regan, Lincon ,Trump, the republicans always have come to the rescue to fix the screw ups of the Democrats.
and why do these kind of threads always come from someone on the right? why do you not see the nefarious forces gathering among you? the alt right? the hate groups? oppressive nations?
your not a hypocrit cause your elected officials lied or did about as good a job as my elected officials. how the hell are you just blaming everyone and making accusations about their character? wtf!
cause conservatives really cleaned up corruption during the Bush years? I think your measuring other parties according to imaginary purity.
Liberals are hypocrites because they say but don't do or change the goverment.Being a conservative or moderate is better and can be trusted more.
both have idiots. that's all. it doesn't matter the party or group.
I did say the same for the left. there are idiots on both sides. however more people on the right seem to subscribe to the tabloid echo chambers than on the left at the current point in time. just see that large amounts of right wing media across multiple media, and the amount of viewers they draw as compared to the left.
are there any left wing tabloids as big, as popular, and as "mainstream" as hannity and rush Limbaugh? I think the young turks are as big as they get and they are mostly a YouTube channel.
I didn't say it's only on the right. I said it's mostly on the right.
your "same thing can be said about the left" is very vague and deceptive. similar is not equal.
I could say the same for the left.
the only reason you believe Hillary is more likely to tamper with votes is cause you likely believe she is also a murdering criminal antichrist. you are a tool.
the whole vote tampering was utter nonsense, just like your ignorant alt right demonization of a typical politician that's as bad/good as any other. better than most actually.
no she does not have a hitman. no she did not laugh at a rape victim. no she is not the f***ing antichrist. she is not killary. people like you are the reason the founders created the Electoral college. uneducated ignorant people living in an echo chamber of tabloid news.
(also so exists on the left, stupid people are everywhere. but there are just wayyy more "alt right" sources and they have wayyy more stupid people listening to them at the moment)
Humans are hypocritical, in general.
History, if the entire election was different and based on popular vote he would of been in Californa and New York but he focused on getting the message to the states that voices were not being heard such as Michigan and Pennsylvania , and there is no evidence that there was any tampering if anything it's more so to believe that Clinton tamperd and commited voter fraud, that's why she never challenged the results
would it matter? the only people able to get him out r the two other branches.
same with left who r rioting and pouting
what ever happened to it being dumb to investigate Hilary? he barely didn't get popular vote. just to clarify that its not as big as it SEEMS u r trying to make it sound
there is a big difference between asking contestants like trump and Hillary to accept the will of the people (which they must) and asking people who owe no obligation and are completely free parties to accept the result.
although it would be nice if everyone behaved (including trump in office) there is no hypocrisy in different expectations from people in vastly different positions.
At this point both sides look pretty hypocritical. Liberals criticized Trump for refusing to say he would respect the results of the election, now those same people are refusing to accept the results. On the flip side Trump criticized the electoral system right up until he won, now Republicans say that the liberals should be quiet and accept it. Can you honestly say you wouldn't protest if Trump had won the popular vote and lost the election?
the right was threatening a civil war if trump lost, now the supposed defenders of the first ammendment are criticizing people for using their constitutional right to gather and protest?
who is the hypocrit?
and there is nothing wrong with the campuses voicing their opinions, the issue is when idiots on the right somehow attribute this tiny, unrepresentative, unelected, voice of a bunch of kids to liberals as a whole.
well trump did receive less votes then clinton. and there is some evidence the results may have been tampered with so it is a good idea to investigate it.
people have very good reason to be critical of the results. besides which it is important that trump knows the majority of the country didn't want him to be President and he does not have a mandate to violate the will of the people.
I agree that these libtard campuses are stupid
Let's see the media is liberal and they are not accepting the results, liberals all over the country are not accepting the results, there has been bills placed towards to abolish the electoral college, there is recounts, these idiots rioting didn't even vote so I'm not going to focus on them in all honesty.
I swear to God if you bring up something said on some stupid isolated campus by a handful of students and attribute that to all liberals I will troll you to no end.
here we go again.