• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rush Limbaugh selection in children’s book competition causes a stir

Modern American liberals are statists, plain and simple.

Tell ya what, you don't owe a dime to whoever taught you to say that.
Something else, modern American conservatives would make William F Buckley, Jr. cringe and shake his head. Whining, foot-stamping, finger-pointing, name-calling, that's always where it starts and where it ends with you lot.
 
I looked up 'classical liberal' and 'liberal' on Wikipedia and they say pretty much the same thing.
From 'Classical Liberalism...
"Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology belonging to liberalism in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government. The philosophy emerged as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization in the 19th century in Europe and the United States.[1] It advocates civil liberties with a limited government under the rule of law, private property, and belief in laissez-faire economic liberalism."
From 'Liberalism'...
"Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property."
I don't see enough difference there to quibble over. Each one should adopt one thing from the other.

I'd concentrate on what means are used to move toward what ends. Both change depending on the subject matter.

Classical liberals tended view government a great deal more suspiciously in the areas where modern liberals do not now, and vice versa.
 
I looked up 'classical liberal' and 'liberal' on Wikipedia and they say pretty much the same thing.
From 'Classical Liberalism...
"Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology belonging to liberalism in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government. The philosophy emerged as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization in the 19th century in Europe and the United States.[1] It advocates civil liberties with a limited government under the rule of law, private property, and belief in laissez-faire economic liberalism."
From 'Liberalism'...
"Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property."
I don't see enough difference there to quibble over. Each one should adopt one thing from the other.
If that definition were true then liberals would have uniformly opposed Obamacare, preferring an individual tax-funded health savings plan instead. Since liberals consistently support infringements on freedom and liberty, that definition cannot be accurate.
 
Last edited:
If that definition were true then liberals would have uniformly opposed Obamacare, preferring an individual tax-funded health savings plan instead. Since liberals consistently support infringements on freedom and liberty, that definition cannot be accurate.

Checkmate.
 
I'd concentrate on what means are used to move toward what ends. Both change depending on the subject matter.

Classical liberals tended view government a great deal more suspiciously in the areas where modern liberals do not now, and vice versa.

This seems reasonable. The Founders would cringe at the though to using the govt to be a means of social change, intrusion "for our own good" etc.
 
And I'm sure you don't know anything about it.

Obviously, I know more about it than you, but feel free to educate us on how The Founders created The United States using Left Wing principles.
 
That's literally like saying

1
2
3
Potato

How on earth does what I said prove your point?

Can you crotique the book based on your acqiured knowledge of it's content?
 
I wonder how many people who will, no doubt, trash this book have actually read it. I haven't, so maybe it is complete garbage. On the other hand, I'm not offended either by the thought of a book that's actually positive about our nations beginnings.

This is what eats at the leftwingnuts.
 
Can you crotique the book based on your acqiured knowledge of it's content?

My post was about the irony of you telling people to think for themselves whilst you only get your news from far right wing sources riddled with commentary and little information.
 
This is what eats at the leftwingnuts.

That amd Rush Limbaugh wrote it.

Chris Matthews could write the exact same book and they would call it the greatest literary work in recent history.

Not a single Libbo in this thread can crticize the books based on anything other than the fact that Rush Limbaugh authored them.
 
My post was about the irony of you telling people to think for themselves whilst you only get your news from far right wing sources riddled with commentary and little information.

The THREAD is about Rush Limbaugh's book. Are you able to discuss their content? Or, do you insist on proving my point? Or, are you going to yell us how Henry Gates is a white supremacist?
 
Liberals consider the Constitution liberal? Why then do they want to scrap it? :shock:

Greetings, apdst. :2wave:

Yet another lame conservative strawman: "liberals want to scrap the constitution."
 
Anyone in the US who actually claims to be "oppressed" is full of it.

I've been saying that about the blacks for years. Glad to see you were paying attention. :peace
 
I've been saying that about the blacks for years. Glad to see you were paying attention. :peace

At one point in the not to distant past, they were. I'd say the only actual "oppression" blacks generally face these days is from law enforcement. But I don't throw that word around very often.
 
Last edited:
That amd Rush Limbaugh wrote it.

Chris Matthews could write the exact same book and they would call it the greatest literary work in recent history.

Not a single Libbo in this thread can crticize the books based on anything other than the fact that Rush Limbaugh authored them.

And that he is a twisted moron who lies like a snake.
 
So the answer is no. Kewl, thanks for sharing your... opinion.

That's what he stands for. Promoting himself and fooling people into thinking he's some kind of principled prophet. Congratulations on being played like a fiddle.
 
Back
Top Bottom