Yesterday, busloads of union thugs showed up in Washington DC. SEIU, etc, marked busses and loads of people carrying pre-printed signs... They assaulted a candidate for Congress, knocking him down.
Did you hear about it in the news? Nope. The liberal media won't tell on their own goons.
So, why do you liberals have to resort to violence? Here's some more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm_Fl3AszuU
Then of course, there were the TEA Party events, where union thugs (isn't that redundant?) beat up a number of people. When are you liberals going to join modern society, and swear off violence, disband your thug gangs?
Violence and lies are the only way these evil people can ascend to power... that and theivery like what is practiced by public service unions!
Says Brenda ? Seriously, how many hatred threads you have created so far on hubpages ? I'll ignore your hate filled remarks on threads but let's just start counting the threads for the sake of stats.
A good example of how liberals make every impersonal question personal
"I'll ignore your hate filled remarks on threads but let's just start counting the threads for the sake of stats."
You're doing a fine job of ignoring.
Ah TKsensei ? I said that i'm going to ignore individual replies which were filled with her hate remarks and will count only thread titles.
Hey, Jim, i saw your icon on a video recently. Is that you? or is that a character from a tv show? or what?
Define hate... oh yes that's any opinion that doesn't agree with yours! Lol
No. You know very well what hatred filled replies mean brenda. Try lol later and start counting.
Why do you keep calling me Brenda??? Do you libs just like being wrong about everything?
Describing the liberal agenda or goals for they are is not "hate". If you want to see "hate" in action, read what liberals say about Palin. It's all personal, emotional, and untrue.
I didn't mentioned anything about agenda in my post. Please take some time to re-read.
I read carefully. You seem to describe any criticism of Democrats, donors, supporters, and ideological allies as "hate".
seems to describe ? Lol. where you got that in my reply ? I didn't say criticizing palin is wrong you did. My only interaction here is with brenda and other troll so far. Where do you get that impression about me making any remarks on clean-image of palin or dems, conservatives ?
I did not say criticism of Palin is wrong. Stop lying! I said, if you want to know what HATE is, then read what liberals and Democrats say about Palin. They don't criticize her, they spout hate, animosity, personal vengeance.
I require honesty from you, if you talk to me. Get used to it. It's the first step in becoming "not liberal".
Really ? check this reply before faking your so-called honesty.
Oh if liberals talk against palin then it's lie and dishonesty and if i disagree with you then it's dishonesty again ? Wow. you gotta be deluded christian to make such attacks.
I did not say criticism of Palin is wrong. Sheesh. Can you not comprehend english?
If you want to know what hate is, read what liberals and Democrats say about Palin.
again, why it has to be untrue if they say anything against palin. Just because you say so ? or you can prove it ? do you have comprehension problem while playing these flip games ?
I didn't say it had be untrue, just because someone criticizes Palin. Stop lying.
I just said, if you want to see true, virulent, unrepentant hatred in action, just read what liberals say about Palin.
check your reply. You said anything against palin from libs is untrue, emotional and hatred. And now you tell me that i'm liar ? wow. Comprehension trouble or can't flip your own words ? When you say anything against libs it has to be true eh ? but not the other way around ?
Palin has nice teeth and should be doing tooth paste or Viagra commercials.
Personal, emotional, and untrue, that sounds like Palin.
NOPE...Just me, A lie is nothing for you and those like to print. weholdthesetruths, You can swear on a stack of Bibles and many Graves and print a lie. That's your job and you are not good at it. Now you in defense of Palin lie on me to me. You hold mis-information, dis-information and distractions up as selfevidence. Even with links supporting the disinformation the right leaning deception is untrue. Nobody is a know it all, nobody is right all the time, and everybody has an opinion. weholdthesetruths, you are not exceptional, but you seem to know all, to be right all the time,and to never respect a liberal's opinion. There are people who lie to intertain, not Palin, but maybe you are trying to intertain, I don't know, It takes all kind of people to make a world.
You are correct about one thing. I do NOT respect liberals "opinion". There is no reason to. It isn't informed, reasoned, logical, or rational.
And you reckon you're informed, logical and rational!
Don't make me laugh.
Its not the goons and liberals I'm worried about...its those signs that were "pre printed", now thats a disaster. damned if I know how some get their shoes on in the morning.
At least they manage to get their shoes on. Barack Obama can't even seem to find his "comfortable shoes" so he can join the thugs out there on the picket line.
Wasn't talking about Obama.
give it a rest dude...the sun will rise tomorrow...I can hear you panting. take deep breath and stop calling people bad things.
And the Tea Tards have to paint R and L on the soles of their shoes to make sure they get them on the right feet.
Has anyone ever thought that the reason liberals have to resort to violence is because they have to do it themselves. They cannot afford to hire professional goons squads like the conservatives can and do.
Really? Seriously? What do you call unions except paid thugs?
You seem to forget why unions were formed in the first place! It was for protection from greedy corporations and businessmen.
Truckers hauling produce from the south, to New York agreed to a price for their efforts. When they reached their destination with the goods, the greedy businessmen and/or companies offered much less than the agreed upon price for their services. If they didn't accept that, they were told to let the produce rot on their trucks.
Other collective bargaining involves safety matters. How many times must a coal mining company get caught violating safety laws before you realize that many men have died unnecessarily due to greedy efforts at increasing profits?
Look at the mess that negligence has left in Bophal India, by Union Carbide! Leaking chemicals killed many thousands, with over 120,000 still waiting for the legal beagles to come to some sort of agreement. Meanwhile, those people go untreated for the most part, and have no say in the matter. Had there been a collective bargaining union there, this tragedy may have been avoided.
I don't call unions "paid thugs", I call them taxpaying citizens wanting fair wages, benefits and safe working conditions. Trusting greedy businessmen and corporations is not an option. People trusted the people in charge of 3 mile island. People trusted Bernie Madoff. people trust the safety measures at mines, and got burned quite often.
Guaranteeing the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, cannot be left up to the whims of the greedy and unscrupulous. When you buy a home, it must pass certain standards and meet codes. When you buy a car, you expect the manufacturer to stand by their promises with some sort of enforcable guarantee that they will be responsible for anything that goes wrong for a certain period of time.
Why do you think that human beings deserve anything less than the ability to earn a livable wage, decent benefits and a safe working environment?
The day that greeed, corruption are a thing of the past, is the day that people will no longer need protection in numbers!
I swear, I cannot keep up. Liberals violent? I thought we were all latte-sipping, pot-smoking, gun-hating intellectual elites who are too busy apologizing for America and holding hands in a circle singing "Give Peace a Chance" to engage in violence. Besides, we're wimpy, remember?.
Skyfire, you said: "You said anything against palin from libs is untrue, emotional and hatred."
You finally understand. It is untrue, emotional, and personal...because it comes from liberals, who live their whole lives that way. What I did NOT say was that it is wrong to criticize Palin, nor that if you critcize her, it has to be untrue.
Would it that liberals actually criticized her... that would be a conversation that could occur, because it would be based on reality. But, that's not the the case. They don't criticize, they simply hate, promote hate, and spew hate.
So if libs criticize her or you then it's hatred and violent and what you're doing against libs and others isn't ? It is only untrue, hatred when libs do it eh ? gotta be deluded christian to say that.
You're still desperately flailing, trying to re-write what I said in simple, plain english, to try to re-interpret things, not to clarify conversation or debate, but to publicly try to defame me. Again, it's the personal, hate-filled approach.
Again, I said that it is not wrong to criticize Palin. I also said, if you want to see hatred in action, read what liberals say about Palin.
You seem to unable to comprehend that liberals do not criticize Palin, in an intellectual manner. They simply spew hatred, animosity, personal vengeance.
Again, what is so difficult for you to comprehend? Liberals hate Palin. Period. And it's hate. Nothing but hate. It's not disagreement, it's hatred.
Really ? So if you attempt to do just that by calling me liar is not at all desperate attempt ? You diverted my discussion from brenda's reply to your so-called flipping games only to eat your own words.
says guy who opened this thread to spit venom against libs and to call others liers for his own mistakes ?yea sure.
So my point holds still the same. What this has to do with my post to brenda. I didn't made any remarks on dems, conservative,libs. Go back and read whole thread again.
Oh so you mean when you do it then it's intellectual manner and when other(including libs) do it then it's not eh ?yours isn't hatred in this thread but what others do is what makes hatred approach ? gotta be deluded christian.
No it's difficult for you to flip your own words when you diverted the discussion and now have no point for you to proceed because you can't eat your own words.
so my point holds, if libs hate palin, your hatred against libs and those who disagree with you isn't supposed to be taken as hatred but more of just intellectual manner opinion eh ?
I'm a liberal, and I don't hate Palin. I just think she should not have been nominated for VP with McCain and that she's not remotely qualified to be president. And from what I've read she wasn't a very good governor. She has a habit of quitting things without finishing them.
When you resort to fiction, to build a personal case against another person....
the motivation is gauranteed to be hate.
Or, perhaps blind partisanship, unguided by any conscience.
And you call your comments, objective and non-partisan. I'm proud to be a partisan with strong opinions. But I don't make ridiculous generalizations about "all conservatives" or call progressives Nazis or communists.
Quote me where I call my comments "objective and non partisan". You know, url and all?
Oh, wait, you made that up, too. More fiction.
I make no pretense of being "utterly alone in the world on my opinion". Lots of people do agree with me, and many are partisans. I, however, am not a member of any party, no do I sign up for party politics, which I loath for a wide array of reasons.
Nor do I pretend I am the epitome of objectivity. If I were, it would not have taken decades to learn simple and easy things, like, the Constitution being right and true and proper.
However, I do make one claim, that is, that I strive for one and one thing alone, to ALWAYS be correct.
Correct in your own mind. Keep striving. Maybe you'll live long enough. But I doubt it. You continually make wild generalizations about liberals as in the ridiculous title of this thread. You'd help your cause if you went a little heavier on the facts and lighter on your opinions.
I don't refer to progressives or liberals as communists or nazis, either.
However, I'd love to see you explain how there is any practical difference between any of them.
I recollect you said something along those lines smearing George Soros who is a liberal, philanthropist capitalist.
No, Soros readily described HIMSELF as a Nazi collaborator.
And Soros is NOT a philanthropist. Soros is a political agitator, who, using his money as influence, tries to topple currencies, and then uses the chaos to drive money his way.
There is NOTHING good about Soros, he helps nobody and his whole agenda is destruction from which he can profit.
Noting like seeing the world in black and white. I commend you to St. Thomas Aquinas' maxim: "Never deny. Seldom affirm. Always distinguish." You seem to find it hard to distinguish truth from fiction as in your claim that Soros called himself a Nazi and never did anything good for anyone. Tell that to the millions of people he helped bring freedom to behind the Iron Curtain.
You don't like Soros' politics. Okay. But why smear him with patently ridiculous claims?
That sounds to me like the pot calling the kettle black. Aren't you the one who called Soros a Nazi?
No, I did not. Are you able to comprehend english?
No Ralph, he called a 13 year-old Jewish kid a "Nazi sympathizer..." loll which is equally ridiculous...
Soros himself described himself as a willing collaborator, for which he felt no guilt.
I suppose I could be gullible for believing Soros when he said such things, but, hey, he IS the only source who could speak with authority. You mocking it merely shows you have neither integrity nor character.
Amen brother, most liberals that I know, myself included aren't violent....most assassinations and attacks are ultra conservative based...except the attack on Reagan. But Hinkley was insane more than an ultra liberal...
Do you... pay any attention, AT ALL? All election violence, union thuggery and violence, violent protests... ALL are liberal, not conservative.
Heck, TEA Party events are known for being so quintessentially conservative, they don't even litter, unlike all the liberal demonstrations.
It wasn't conservatives who burned businesses and smashed cars while protesting things like the G8 summit. It wasn't conservatives who rioted in LA and other places. Conservatives do not hire union goons to go around and beat up the opposition.
The violence, including the violent rhetoric (like a recent Massachusetts elected official telling the unions to GET BLOODY), comes ALL from the left, not the right. Even the One (you know, bow down and worship him) Obama said "bring a gun..."
The fact is, Obama is lawless, and promotes lawlessness, as does the rest of the left. The violence that follows is neither surprising nor unexpected.
Loughner was liberal? Roeder was liberal? The Militias are liberal, e.g. Tim McVeigh?
loughner was/is insane. I'm quite certain he is neither an ardent conservative or liberal. I'm also quite certain he isn't rational enough to be considered anything. McVeigh wasn't a political conservative. He was a militant for something, and that what nobody seems to really want to know. they just slap labels on him for convenient political purposes.
You seem to fail to grasp what a "conservative" is and just slap that label on anything you don't like. Again, the deeds of a desperate partisan, not a thinker.
Having a civil discussion with you is impossible. Bye, bye.
Baloney. Why don't you tell us what you think is so great about Palin? I've pointed out several things about her that make me think she's unqualified.
What's great about Palin? Effective team leader. Rock solid common sense. Great understanding of the country, it's people, and both our history and possible future.
Solid grasp of energy issues and global relevance of said issues.
Not given to wild hysteric liberal claptrap, like Obama is.
What she says is what she thinks. ( again, utterly unlike Obama)
Reasonable grasp of economic issues. (again, unlike Obama, the most ignorant person in the country on such matters)
Oh, and doesn't talk down to people. Believes in government serving, not ruling.
Palin isn't my first choice, and not even my second. But I'd still vote for her with great enthusiasm.
Ummm. . It's not violence when liberals do it? Duhh!
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawk … hould_know
Against Sarah Palin.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- … 03544.html
Against Bristol Palin.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hhutc … lin-funny/
Against Eric Cantor.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atla … antor.html
It all just goes to show that crazy knows no boundaries. However, which political philosophy eschews boundaries more than the other. Answer honestly and you will have some insight.
Well, from reading what is posted here I have to say "republican".
of c ourse you have to SAY that. Honesty would compel you to alter your thinking.
What would you know? So blinkered and deaf you wouldn't know honesty if it upped and bit you on the bum!
Liberalism is violent by definition. It is the application of mob rule vs. property rights of individuals. Liberalism believes that the majority have the right to take property away from the minority.
Ayn Rand lived through this in her native country and saw the evil of those who ruled through the politics of take from the rich and give to the poor.
She became a political philosopher, came to America and began writing against the evils of liberalism, communism, and socialism.
Over 50 years ago, she predicted that the republican party would promote big government just as much as the democratic party. The only difference would be where they wanted the money to go. The republicans want money to mainly go to corporations and war, while the democrats want social programs. Both want big government. Neither support honest money.
If you want to understand the liberal socialist mindset, read "Atlas Shrugged". I personally believe that this book is the greatest book ever written by a single human.
I agree with you.
http://www.atlassociety.org/review-atla … art-1-film
This is one more phony post. I invite anyone to watch the video in the OP. Now what did you SEE? Nothing but camera wildly shaking and noise to create a false impression. The "attacker" is still holding his sign. Compare that to the real video of Ron Paul thugs attacking groping and standing on the head of the girl from move on.
Now think over the phony "evidence" like the edited Shirley Shared tape. What about the gun-toting conservatives at Obama speaking venues? How many republicans from Congress have been shot in the head? The militia group Hutaree ultra-conservative Christians. They were planning to kill cops and bomb the funeral. Not liberals.
What a phony crock of smiley feces.
Doug, you old liar. The goon struck the woman holding the camera. You want to say it's faked, because you're so desperately partisan, you can't admit that union goons are violent, it might "taint" the party you vow your allegiance to.
the problem is? There are literally scores of videotaped incidences of the same thing going on. It all goes one way... Union thugs committing violence upon others. And generally getting away with it, and nary a complaint from any Democrat.
Your desperate attempt at misportrayal.... is your obvious approval of the behavior. If you didn't approve, you would criticize instead of lying.
Dozens of incidents? Where? Why didn't you post them? And why do you ignore the many specific counterexamples?
Again, please reflect.
Yes, and he struck her so hard with his cardboard placard that it was totally undamaged!.
It was the most amateurish piece of fakery I've ever seen, is that the best you can do?
First calling me a liar is a personal attack unless there is a lie. What I pointed out is a clear fact. The video shows NOTHING that is claimed in the way of an attack. I did make on observation, an opinion based on previous right-wing fraud that the video in the OP is one more fraud. It's my opinion that there was no attack. It's a hard cold FACT that the video in the OP does not SHOW any assault.I
Liberals feel that no matter what a person wants or needs it should be given to them. Liberals feel that the government is the answer to all problems.
The reason they are soo violent is that they want all to be able to do what they want, no matter what or who gets offended by it. They also want to playcate all those that just want to be heard even if their voice is filthy or not.
They also don't want anything to be taken away from those that have it - like the Wisconsin teachers - the teachers collective bargining rights have not been taken away, however their bargining right to extra benefits and pay raises based on longivity have, and the unions do fill the pockets of the Democrats/Liberals.
It is a truly disgusting political ideology based on faulty premises and fueled by racism and fear and always resulting in poverty and death. Over and over again. Will they never learn?
The Senior you seem to have a clear understanding about liberals. you know how they feel, how they think, what they want and you're not a liberal. Being a conservative can you tell me how a conservative feels, what they think, and what they want? In your own words. I really want to know, this is not a trick question.
No, I think the typical liberal's thought goes something like this: if the government is going to dote on business and the rich perhaps it should also dote on the non-rich and non-business owners. Now the truth is, government currently dotes on both. The issue is that it's a bit lop-sided toward the wealthy and business.
So called Conservatives are all profiteers, which means they are really progressives. Progressives are just as idiotic, in that they tend to non-profit
which is Conservative socialist.
Accusations of wholesale deliberate thuggery are backed up with one video a guy pushing a camera out of his face in the course of a heated argument.
Is that the best evidence of 'violent liberals' you've got?
On the other hand, you've got a rich tradition--a weird phrase to use in this context!--of conservatives using or advocating violence, from Gordon LIbby to Rush Limbaugh.
--Gordon Libby: "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests."--August 26, 1994
--Repeated assassinations of abortion services providers, including the bombings of the Olympics, a dance club and two abortion clinics, killing (IIRC) 6 people, carried out by Eric Rudolph.
--Thousands of radical conservatives have formed armed groups and regularly train in the use of lethal force. Most adopt a defensive stance, but some have gone over onto the offensive against a political system they perceive as oppressive and illegal:
"Within 90 days [in 2009] came the Von Brunn shooting [of a security guard; the plan was to murder an Obama advisor]; a triple murder of police officers in Pittsburgh by white supremacist Richard Andrew Poplawski; and a double murder of sheriff's deputies in Florida by a National Guardsman, Joshua Cartwright, who attributed his rage to Obama's election.
"The specter of the lone-wolf terrorist is what most worries law-enforcement officials, who return again and again to the searing example of Timothy McVeigh. Before destroying the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995, killing 168 people, McVeigh cycled through several white-supremacist groups and militias. In the end he decided to act alone, abetted by his friend Terry Nichols."
(Time magazine, September 30, 2010)
--Right-wing talk radio hosts routinely advocate violence. One example: Rush Limbaugh calling for climate scientists to be "drawn and quartered" on November 24, 2009:
In fact, a number of higher-profile climate scientists have received death threats and have required security protection, though thankfully no actual assassination attempts have occurred so far.
So, when 'liberal violence' is decried, I think that a little reflection is in order. Preferably self-reflection.
Been out looking for video of these 'scores' of violent acts of union thuggery alleged by some on this thread. Haven't found any yet, except for the one of the guy pushing the camera out of his face. Did come across this, though:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/1 … itol-clean
Students from UW Madison, organizing cleaning for the portions of the Wisconsin capitol that's been occupied during this emergency.
Pretty ironic, in the light of what some folks are saying here.
Oh, well, gotta go--I'm still looking for evidence of union 'thuggery.' No time to rest.
Then there was this:
At one point in the phone conversation, a caller who identified himself as billionaire David Koch, a Walker ally and campaign supporter, asked about "planting some troublemakers" to incite the crowds at what have been peaceful protests. The caller was actually Ian Murphy, a blogger who goes by the name of the Buffalo Beast.
"(We) thought about that," replied the governor, who added: "My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems."
Here's Mayor Cieslewicz's response:
"Our police department estimates that maybe a half million people have come through the Capitol Square in the last 10 days. They've come with high emotions, and there have been counter protesters. So you might expect trouble. Instead, what we've gotten is high civic engagement and peaceful protest. We have not had a single arrest over the course of the protests.
"And we're neat, also. I stop and chat from time to time with the Capital Concourse crews who clean the Square, and they tell me that the place is cleaner than ever. People are taking care of the municipal lawn as well as their own living rooms. Last night when I was inside the Capitol, the protestors organized a cleaning hour, clearing out of the rotunda to allow the sweepers and mops to come through. We're living up to our reputation for Midwest politeness."
Glad Walker didn't go with his first thought.
Liberals are so violent because the violence is liberally used by them. When violence is used, how can they be liberal? They are just terrorists.
Here's some on-scene video of the demonstration at the Capitol in Madison. It's loud, but look at the faces of the protestors.
They are your neighbors, sociologically speaking. Fifty-something guys in ball-caps, lots of young (and not-so-young) women--hey, it's the teacher's union Walker's trying to bust, after all. Kids, too. College students. We're not talking about Teamster goon squads.
If the folks in this video are 'thugs,' then we're *all* thugs.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/02/ho … onsin.html
In the context of current events suppose they would be called teachers. "Here's looking at you kid".
by Repairguy47 5 years ago
http://www.conservapedia.com/Liberal_hate_speechhttp://dailycaller.com/2011/01/17/liber … -standard/
by Jane Ramona Rynkiewicz Frieman 3 years ago
This quote is philosophical. In my personal experience, acquiring knowledge was not just handed over, it was a goal to be worked towards by way of learning life's lessons, reasoning out what's right and last but not least personal experience (what life has taught me). Feel free to express your own...
by Holle Abee 6 years ago
On the names Bill Maher called Sarah Palin:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ … maher.htmlBUT they had a field day with what Rush said. And before you even ask, yes, I did say on these forums that Fluke should have NEVER been called names. I can't stand Rush, but fair is fair. It gets...
by Susan Reid 6 years ago
I can only surmise he's setting us up for a super duper vetting job by the Romney campaign on whoever they're going to announce as his VEEP.But seriously.Why is Dick Cheney getting airtime in 2012 talking about the mistake John McCain made in 2008 choosing Sarah Palin? That she wasn't ready.Tell us...
by LBMod 7 years ago
The tragedy this past week in Arizona has drummed up all sorts of emotions and fears in the American public as well it should. What happened to the victims of that heinous act of senseless violence is horrifying, some might say unacceptable. And while I’m sure we can all agree that it was...
by weholdthesetruths 7 years ago
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 05400.htmlThey might be perfectly fine with someone who wants to be the other gender, but, heaven forbid, they find someone with a different view of government, it's just too much evil to stomach, apparently.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|