Obama welcomes Castro's Criticism of America: 'I Personally Would Not Disagree'

[ark steel]

Why would he need to research? He is a free thinker who just happens to parrot leftist bullshit.

 

[Steel Vanguard]

So you are wrong, and apparently too lazy to conduct even basic research on a point you assert.

Further, your comment about conservative Americans, Putin and Muslim extremists shows once again that you do not view conservatives as simply having a different political and life view than you; you think conservatives are evil.

American conservatism, like Zionism and Jihatism, is really proto-fascism/authoritarianism. These are not benign ideals, they are based on hatred, ignorance, and a sociopathic disregard for the humanity of others. Interstingly, leftist socialism and radical feminism share many of the same authoritarian traits. Extremism in general is what's wrecking politics. Conservatives are just less subtle about whom they hate.

Do you know whose philosophy you are following? Saul Alinsky, who proposed the technique of personalizing and polarizing the political opposition 45 years ago:

"Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame."

The left has employed this technique for generations, leading to the present environment where the left views conservatives as evil. The real problem, of course, is that when you believe your opponent is evil, then you are free to do whatever you want to oppose the enemy. Look at the behavior of protesters who disrupt conservative events - they believe that yelling profanity in front of young children, rushing the stage, blocking traffic, shouting, threats, etc. are acceptable.

The binary false narrative of evil dichotomies runs just as strong though conservatives as it does liberals. The vilification of Obama by the right proves this. So you're the sink calling the bathtub "white". The problem, as I said, is extremism on both sides. I argue against conservative extremism on this board because that's who's here: conservative extremists.

Why? Because the ideological opponent is evil. It is that simple.

So does the tactic of labeling the ideological opponent as evil advance the debate? Of course not. And what is now happening - and what the left is squealing about - is that conservatives appear to have had enough of this ****, and are not going to let the protesters have their way. That has led to the scuffles we have recently seen and that promises to get even worse.

What you see are sheep being manipulated by a charismatic leader. Conservatism, as a culture, is about conformity. Doing as you're told, not bucking the system. They love charismatic leaders who tell them that if they simply bow to their great authority, all will be fine. You're not going to get tortured or killed, only the "bad people" will. But only if you give Charismatic Leader the power to torture and kill. And it seems you fall for it every time. Hitler was democratically elected to office.

The simple fact is that you are a follower of the ideological approach that permits - no, in fact it promotes - the name-calling, confrontations, physical altercations and overt hostility that dominates politics today.

Because, of course, right wingers don't do any of those things do they? Of course they do. Because they're people, and people do those things.

The problem is not that Republicans are evil, or that racism dominates the ideology of your political opponents; the problem is that the Alinsky method now dominates the left, to the point that they believe Republicans are murderous Nazis and of course there are no limits on what you can do or say to oppose murderous Nazis ... right?

Bigotry dominates and it's not subtle. Several posters on this board have said, outright, that they hate Muslims. They duck the issue of hating Blacks because that puts them into a category of bigot they're afraid to be labelled with. So they just talk about Blacks in the same hateful manner that they do Muslims, without admitting they hate them. Which is nutless.

But to the original point: Neverminding the biases in your little graphic, it still says what I said. Most social liberals identify as "moderates". And since fully two thirds or so of the population is "moderate" or "liberal" that leaves a gross minority of people who are conservatives. Add to that the fact since 1988 (28 years ago) only one Republican Presidential Candidate has won the popular vote, it's clear that this country is center left. Local and state districts are highly gerrymandered, so congress and governorships can be highly misleading indicators of national political bent.

 

[hamster]

It amazes me the vitriol.

You lost. But you lost a long time ago.

Europe is lost, thanks to the liberal brainiacs. It is on its way to being a third world shithole. This country is almost lost, hopefully there are enough makers left. Possibly the takers have won. Sad.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I argue against conservative extremism on this board because that's who's here: conservative extremists.

And you're not a Left Wing Extremist? You're not employing Saul's tactics?

I'll refer you to one True Colors post you made and my rebuttal, which you refuse to address.

Show us your True Colors Steel...not that we can't already see them, plain as day.

Spin, spin, spin.

 

[Steeltime]

American conservatism, like Zionism and Jihatism, is really proto-fascism/authoritarianism. These are not benign ideals, they are based on hatred, ignorance, and a sociopathic disregard for the humanity of others. Interstingly, leftist socialism and radical feminism share many of the same authoritarian traits. Extremism in general is what's wrecking politics. Conservatives are just less subtle about whom they hate.

Look, simply repeating claims about how evil conservatives are does not constitute evidence or proof, and instead simply confirms what I am saying - like many leftists, you believe those who hold conservative views are actually evil. For **** sake, you compared conservatives to Islam extremists - you know, the crazy ******* who behead people, and blow up schools and markets.

Further, your claim that conservatives promote and support authoritarianism is simply not true. The only entity which can MAKE me behave a certain way is the one with the army, police force, and jails. Conservatives do not support transferring more and more power to government - liberals do. Conservatives do not believe that government should decide how much I am paid, what I eat, what I drive, what I learn in schools, what my medical insurance covers, how much groceries cost, nor do conservatives believe that government should pay my rent or buy my food - liberals do.

Authoritarianism is defined as "of or relating to a governmental or political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people." Conservatives believe in individual responsibility and a government of defined and limited power - i.e., the opposite of authoritarianism.

The binary false narrative of evil dichotomies runs just as strong though conservatives as it does liberals. The vilification of Obama by the right proves this. So you're the sink calling the bathtub "white". The problem, as I said, is extremism on both sides. I argue against conservative extremism on this board because that's who's here: conservative extremists.

Once again, you simply brush past the key point - conservatives believe Obama is wrong, not evil. (That certainly describes my view of things.) The difference is crucial, since once again, if you are convinced that an opponent is evil, then you feel justified in engaging in obnoxious behavior when voicing your opposition.

How many times, for example, have conservatives crashed an Obama rally, yelled profanities, picked fights, held signs insulting Obama, and interrupted his speech? Please, point to those times conservatives have done so.

What you see are sheep being manipulated by a charismatic leader. Conservatism, as a culture, is about conformity. Doing as you're told, not bucking the system. They love charismatic leaders who tell them that if they simply bow to their great authority, all will be fine. You're not going to get tortured or killed, only the "bad people" will. But only if you give Charismatic Leader the power to torture and kill. And it seems you fall for it every time. Hitler was democratically elected to office.

I presume you are referring to Trump, but don't name him for some reason. So let me retort:

Trump is not a conservative. Numerous conservative posters on this forum have questioned Trump's credentials and qualifications, and have pointed out that he is not a conservative and in fact vocally supported Hillary Clinton just a few years ago. Further, several posters in this forum, including Coolie and me, among others, have made clear their concerns about Trump. This idea that conservatives swoon over sweet-talking authoritarians is just not true.

So go ahead and give an example of this siren authoritarian that hypnotized conservatives ... Reagan? If you make that claim for him, you may as well stop arguing. Reagan ran for office four times and won all four times, by significant margins. He won votes from every segment of society. His presidency was the best of the last 100 years. Who, then? Give one example.

Also, a brief history lesson. Hitler's party never held a majority. He rose to power via force - he was arrested the first time he tried to seize power, and succeeded the second. So your statement that Hitler was democratically elected is marginally true, but fails to note that he stole power by force.

Because, of course, right wingers don't do any of those things do they? Of course they do. Because they're people, and people do those things.

Two points: (1) When was the last time conservatives stopped traffic, or disrupted a Democratic function, or interrupted an Obama speech, or infiltrated a private Democratic function and screamed at the speaker, and shouted profanities in front of young kids? Look, it may have happened and I did not hear about it, so give me some links showing this is going on.

(2) If it's going on - okay, so what? The **** is wrong, for anybody engaged in the behavior. However, the playbook for such tactic is a Democratic, liberal go-to. How about all concerned knock that **** off? Do you agree that chaining yourself to vehicles to clog traffic to "protest" something is unacceptable? I look forward to your answer.

Bigotry dominates and it's not subtle. Several posters on this board have said, outright, that they hate Muslims. They duck the issue of hating Blacks because that puts them into a category of bigot they're afraid to be labelled with. So they just talk about Blacks in the same hateful manner that they do Muslims, without admitting they hate them. Which is nutless.

So your argument is conservative posters on Steeler Nation forum say things you consider racist, proving conservatives are racist.

Okaaaaay ... you realize that your own views about [x] people is not actually evidence, right? Meanwhile, actual research data show that conservatives give more generously to charity than do liberals.

While most coverage of the report has focused on the finding that top-earners have been giving a smaller share of their income to charity than poorer Americans, The Chronicle study also highlights "giving patterns," broken out by state and compared against how each state voted in the 2012 presidential election, i.e., whether it went for Romney or Obama.

Overall, the states in which people gave the highest percentage of their adjusted gross incomes were also states that voted for Romney, while states in which people gave the lowest percentage of their adjusted gross income went for Obama. The top 17 states for rate of giving all went for Romney.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2014/10/17/Who-s-More-Generous-Liberals-or-Conservatives

I guess they just give to "white only" charities, right?

Further, the hostility toward Muslims is predicated on what they do, not who they are. Here is something they have done, and not that long ago:

And this:

And this:

So please, for the love of God, stop pretending that the hostility towards Muslims is race-based. Further, your unsubstantiated allegation that some unknown posters have animosity towards African-Americans solely based on race is based on your allegation, and nothing else.

So I respond - false. My allegation trumps yours since you make a claim that you need to substantiate.

But to the original point: Neverminding the biases in your little graphic, it still says what I said. Most social liberals identify as "moderates". And since fully two thirds or so of the population is "moderate" or "liberal" that leaves a gross minority of people who are conservatives. Add to that the fact since 1988 (28 years ago) only one Republican Presidential Candidate has won the popular vote, it's clear that this country is center left. Local and state districts are highly gerrymandered, so congress and governorships can be highly misleading indicators of national political bent.

Never mind the facts, full speed ahead? You claimed, "The ENTIRE WESTERN WORLD has gone leftist. At least HALF of America has gone leftist. You guys are crying about something that happened THIRTY YEARS AGO. The right wing ship has sailed."

Uhhh, no. Not at all. In point of fact, self-described conservatives substantially outnumber self-described liberals.

And please, for heaven's sake, the tactic of ignoring evidence by labeling it "biased" is not a valid approach. How about you cite a survey showing that "more than half" of America has gone "leftist"?

 

[Stewey]

Leftist lunacy Vanguard ascribes to.