A magnificent example of why not to use "liberal" as an attack/insult

[Wanderling]

Define "liberal" and "conservative" please.

Was Lincoln a conservative ?

Was Teddy Roosevelt a liberal ?

Just because someone waves a Bible in other people's face or is trying to leave important policy making decisions that impact every citizen to big businesses that push money around, doesn't make them "conservative". They are radicals.

Just because someone is pro-Welfare, pro uncontrolled immigration, and believes that people of a particular skin color or gender can't be racist or abusive by definition, doesn't make them "liberal". They are, again, radicals.

All that "liberal" vs "conservative" talk does is to allow one thing - keep radicals from both parties in power by polarizing their support base, and not letting centrist, moderate politicians to run the country as it should be ran, making common sense compromises with everyone's best interests in mind.

 

[Field Tester]

So who are the pro-gun liberal politicians that pro-gun liberal voters can support?

We're not talking about politicians in regards to how the tone of the word is used, we're talking about the people.
Why do you continue to attempt to derail this thread? You have attempted to change the subject several times.
Is it so hard to understand that we do not want to alienate potential voters? The rhetoric will get us nowhere.

 

[jerkface11]

I assume that people who identify as liberal will vote for liberals.

 

[Nom de Forum]

You support stricter gun laws but think you're not anti-gun?

Yup!

Some need to be stricter and some need to be more lenient.

 

[Wanderling]

Even when I was not yet pro-gun and far more to the left of center as I am now, I had hard time finding "liberal" politicians to vote for. Accidentally, I see just as few "conservative" ones today.

Truth is, the political landscape is pretty barren, and has been for quite some time. Our last two presidents were / are absolutely terrible, in my opinion, even though they come from the opposite ends of political spectrum.

 

[Theohazard]

If you keep saying that it is the fault of pro-gun people that Liberals are anti-gun, then you are right, there is nothing further to discuss.

Where did I ever say that!? You're using the time-honored method of distorting and outright fabricating someone's argument to make it easier to attack. It's called a "straw man" and it's a disgusting and dishonest way to debate someone.

 

[danez71]

If the idea is that you can be liberal and still be pro-gun then there must be pro-gun liberals for you to vote for. Otherwise you have no point.

My views don't exist because their is a politician I can vote for.

You are apparently different in that respect.

 

[jerkface11]

Like I said earlier if you're voting for antigun politicians you aren't progun.

 

[Field Tester]

Like I said earlier if you're voting for antigun politicians you aren't progun.

Or you're a single issue voter.
I'll be honest though, my 2nd Amendment rights come before a lot of other issues, but I don't blame anyone for weighing all their options.

 

[XD Fan]

I lean heavily right. I usually disagree with self proclaimed liberals, often vehemently. However, equating liberal and anti-gun is a serious PR mistake. No, pro-gun liberals will probably not vote in a way I feel supports the 2A, but they may well support pro-gun organizations financially, contact fence sitting legislators, and argue for our side of the issue. Let's not ostracize them in our PR efforts.

 

[oneounceload]

politicians to run the country as it should be ran, making common sense compromises with everyone's best interests in mind.

That's funny right there - II don't care who you are............

 

[Vodoun da Vinci]

I'm a pro gun individual who is sick and tired of "black and white", right and wrong, liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat....nothing about my rights will ever or has ever been so simple as this. I want more candidates that are socially liberal and financially conservative that support gun ownership as well as a national health plan.

Instead I get bumper sticker solutions that deliberately divide all of us against each other and political system that is completely impotent and detached. Polarization only benefits the zealots. I'm not a liberal or a conservative and I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I own guns and think others right to own them should not be infringed...but I loath the present Republican party and it's basic hard line. I favor some form of national health care yet loath the present Democrat party and platform.

I have no representation in government. Calling me names will only alienate me. There are millions of me now. We need more options. Not more bumper sticker slogans and black/white - right/wrong - Republican/Democrat crap. Calling folks liberals and defining them as anti gun because of that label won't help us gun owners.

VooDoo

 

[Cee Zee]

The WV reference is a good one since it is the Liberals that wish to shut down the coal mines that sustain the people of those hills but they keep blindly pulling the lever until not only their guns are gone but so is their livelihood.

Actually the state of WV was rock solid D since the Civil War for the most part. They were part of the old south having split off from Ole Virginny herself. The issues you describe among others have made many traditional people in WV finally switch their voting habits. But wow this thread shows clearly why we don't need to be talking politics in general here.

Look at the divisions we have here when we start talking politics. We have people calling Christians "radicals". Do you think that's a good way for 2A supporters here to reach out to Christians? Good grief just discussing politics has caused the biggest flame war I've ever seen on this board. I'm not interested in the politics of people here. I've had my beliefs slammed by a dozen people and I haven't said a word about what I think about anything. I just see the same extreme divisions of the political parties ripping this place apart. I surely hope this thread will be shut down and soon because it isn't doing anything except hurting us. I dang sure am not going to agree with everyone here. That would be impossible. I'm not here to have my core beliefs slammed by people either. We have ONE thing in common here and we are risking our political unity on that issue because some say we should slam others because they don't always agree with us.

If I wanted to dabble in politics it wouldn't be here. We have a common goal and we should stick to it. I don't need to be called a "radical" by people here (he singled out people who believe pretty much everything as being "radical" so it doesn't matter what I believe in his eyes everyone is a radical apparently). Slamming the faith of people is a really bad idea under any circumstances. I'm sure there are some who would slam people for not believing in God too and those unbelievers could easily be portrayed as "radical". That isn't why I come to this board. I'm done in this thread. Again I hope the thread is done soon. That's the reason boards have moderators (not telling them how to do their job - just pointing out that it happens on all boards for a reason). Everyone here should remember we have a common cause. Starting a giant flame war is a waste of time.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I'm a pro gun individual who is sick and tired of "black and white", right and wrong, liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat....nothing about my rights will ever or has ever been so simple as this. I want more candidates that are socially liberal and financially conservative that support gun ownership as well as a national health plan.

Instead I get bumper sticker solutions that deliberately divide all of us against each other and political system that is completely impotent and detached. Polarization only benefits the zealots. I'm not a liberal or a conservative and I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I own guns and think others right to own them should not be infringed...but I loath the present Republican party and it's basic hard line. I favor some form of national health care yet loath the present Democrat party and platform.

I have no representation in government. Calling me names will only alienate me. There are millions of me now. We need more options. Not more bumper sticker slogans and black/white - right/wrong - Republican/Democrat crap. Calling folks liberals and defining them as anti gun because of that label won't help us gun owners.

VooDoo

Ditto.

 

[blarby]

I was gonna use "neener" neener, but that'd be mean.

Blarby "likes" this thread.


Be careful who you alienate, you never know if that guy just might be in the middle of taking the shirt off his back to help ya.


3 internets for Vodoun.

 

[Kynoch]

If the idea is that you can be liberal and still be pro-gun then there must be pro-gun liberals for you to vote for. Otherwise you have no point.

You are wrong. There are a multitude of ways (which have already been discussed) in which one may show support for our 2A rights in addition to whom they vote for.

This thread is about "A magnificent example of why not to use "liberal" as an attack/insult." Please don't try to derail it again.

 

[Kynoch]

Define "liberal" and "conservative" please.

Was Lincoln a conservative ?

Was Teddy Roosevelt a liberal ?

Just because someone waves a Bible in other people's face or is trying to leave important policy making decisions that impact every citizen to big businesses that push money around, doesn't make them "conservative". They are radicals.

Just because someone is pro-Welfare, pro uncontrolled immigration, and believes that people of a particular skin color or gender can't be racist or abusive by definition, doesn't make them "liberal". They are, again, radicals.

All that "liberal" vs "conservative" talk does is to allow one thing - keep radicals from both parties in power by polarizing their support base, and not letting centrist, moderate politicians to run the country as it should be ran, making common sense compromises with everyone's best interests in mind.

Please don't obfuscate/attempt to derail this thread with such noise.

 

[OilyPablo]

I just liberally applied two NO ON I-594 stickers on my car!

 

[Kynoch]

I wonder what would happen if some of the people who use "liberal" as a pejorative were stuck in the middle of no where, out of gas and a Prius rolled up sporting an Obama sticker and one of those silly "coexist" decals?

What if the Prius driver got out and offered their full can of lawn mower gas they were in the midst of fetching? Would the "conservative" big mouth reject the offer of help because the Prius driver supported Obama and had bad taste in decals?

Doubtful.

 

[Theohazard]

I just liberally applied two NO ON I-594 stickers on my car!

Speaking of I-594, I've managed to convince several of my liberal friends and relatives to vote against it. I approached it in a completely non-partisan way and simply pointed out how draconian the law is and how it will make criminals out of people who simply temporarily hand a gun to a friend.

I doubt they would've been as receptive if I had antagonized them by using the kind of politically-charged language that many gun owners like to use.

 

[OilyPablo]

Speaking of I-594, I've managed to convince several of my liberal friends and relatives to vote against it. I approached it in a completely non-partisan way and simply pointed out how draconian the law is and how it will make criminals out of people who simply temporarily hand a gun to a friend.

I doubt they would've been as receptive if I had antagonized them by using the kind of politically-charged language that many gun owners like to use.

Right on. I've done the same. It's not EXACTLY liberals pushing this one. It seems to be big money rich guys that like to maybe come off as liberals along with usual crowd of gun haters, who just happen to mainly vote and act liberal. BUTTTTTT that does not mean they get the automatic D vote like candidates here in this state do. People tend to not like overly complex initiatives that limit freedom, regardless of what pigeon hole people try to label them with. Of course the press here seems to think such a law will automagically solve gun crime. All of it. Word choice by the talking heads falls on the any gun control will help bandwagon.

 

[bigfinger76]

This thread, though frustrating, is heartening.

The vast majority here seem to agree. Only a small minority appear to unable to think any further than overly simplistic black-and-white, bumper-sticker ideals.

I don't identify as "liberal", but I most certainly could be mistaken for one due to my views on a lot of issues. Americans like me likely number in the millions, and I can assure you that this movement absolutely needs us.

I wish there were pols I could get excited about, but there are not. I have to "hold my nose" regardless of what candidates I pick.

 

[X-Rap]

I wonder what would happen if some of the people who use "liberal" as a pejorative were stuck in the middle of no where, out of gas and a Prius rolled up sporting an Obama sticker and one of those silly "coexist" decals?

What if the Prius driver got out and offered their full can of lawn mower gas they were in the midst of fetching? Would the "conservative" big mouth reject the offer of help because the Prius driver supported Obama and had bad taste in decals?

Silliest "straw dog" post yet.
I wonder what that Prius driver does when he sees that "don't tread on me" and I'm the NRA and I vote" bumper sticker on the back of that jacked up Power Stroke Ford with the gun rack in the window?
Anyone hazard a guess?
You've made the assumption that he is a "Conservative Big Mouth" all ready so I just filled in the rest of your stereotype.

 

[X-Rap]

Wonder what that Conservative gun owner would do if he came upon our Prius driver being raped at a rest stop?

 

[Kynoch]

Silliest "straw dog" post yet.
I wonder what that Prius driver does when he sees that "don't tread on me" and I'm the NRA and I vote" bumper sticker on the back of that jacked up Power Stroke Ford with the gun rack in the window?
Anyone hazard a guess?
You've made the assumption that he is a "Conservative Big Mouth" all ready so I just filled in the rest of your stereotype.

Do you even have a clue what a straw dog/straw man argument is? Any at all? Seriously, would you be able to tell us what a "strawman (argument)" is without first Googling it? I see people dismissing posts on these forums by claiming they're "strawman" and it's clear they have no clue what they're talking about -- and you clearly are one of those people.