Why are "Liberal" and "Democrat" hurled as insults?

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly76201

Inactive
And yes, this is weapons related.
I'm a gun owner and avid shooter. I am also a liberal [my personal definition of a liberal is someone who doesn't seek to impose their morals on someone else and expects the same] and a Democrat. I'm a democrat, partly b/c of how I was raised... "No working man ever prospered under a Republican administration" were words I heard at the dinner table from 1964 - 2004. And it seems to me that a fair percentage [ not all, but more than I'm comfortable with] of Conservative Christians want to force all Americans to think and worship and behave as they do or be branded Godless, Socialistic, liberal, Democratic, scum. Those thoughts seem to be represented on this board in several of the forums I regularly visit.
I came to this board thinking members would set their personal politics and religious views aside and discuss guns and how much fun they are.
Instead I'm finding vitriolic attacks on past and present lawfully elected officials, liberals, Democrats, and gays [to a lesser extent]. Not every liberal is an enemy of gun rights. Not every Democrat is an enemy of gun rights.
Painting all liberals and Democrats as such is unfair and self defeating in our supposed purpose of increasing tolerance and even acceptance and enthusiasm for shooting sports.
Now I've got my asbestos Vickies on, so flame away.
 
Mainly because people often use as pejoratives words that describe what they are not.

I certainly use it at times. Why? Because the Democrats stand for so many pivotal things that I'm against, so of course to me and many of the people with whom I choose to associate being called a Democrat is a bad thing.

" "No working man ever prospered under a Republican administration" were words I heard at the dinner table from 1964 - 2004."

Where's the puking icon when you need it.

Fiscally, my most traumatic time was under Bill Clinton, and the last 6 years of George Bush have been a roll in the frigging green.

I suppose, though, since I wear slacks and sit at a computer, I'm not a "working man."

I really wonder if anyone around your dinner table ever heard of Jimmy Carter? I know quite a few working people in the area where I grew up who, during the Carter years of malaise, "propsered" their way right into receivership.

I also know quite a few of them who quit the Democratic party and became confirmed Reaganites because they truly prospered in the 1980s and 1990s.
 
Not all Democrats are flaming liberals. You can blame people like Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer, Ted Kennedy and Hilliary to name a few who have taken the party hard left. Groups like the ACLU, Naral, Move on.org and others amplify this. I'm a Conservative Christian and I could care less what people believe or do but when I see US senators wanting all firearms confiscated and liberal groups suing gun manufacturers and suing localities for having crosses on war memorials and changing streets named after war heros who gave their lives for their country to the 25th street in town named after the same person you bet I get upset. I see it the other way, hardcore leftists pushing their ideoligies on the rest of us. You want to talk vitriol, look at the way they go after a sitting president in a time of war.
 
Mike-
Holly's got a point, though. Conservatives these days are hardly the party of "less government" .....in fact, they bear little resemblance to Reagan Conservatives. But then, "we're at War" today; Reagan simply won one at a time we didn't know we were supposed to be giving up pieces of the Bill of Rights to help. Today's "conservatives" are hardly the party of "Live and Let Live".

Personally, I think we should turn a bimd eye to party affiliation. Politicians should be branded based on their actions and statements regarding personal liberties, personal responsibilities and personal rights in the face of a monolithic government weight on all of the above.
Rich
 
Who do you think is pushing the anti-gun agenda ?
It certainly isn't the conservative right wing.

Liberal Democrats stand for everything that I think is wrong with this country. I am a blue collar working man. I am a union firefighter. My union sends me mail all the time begging me to vote for the most liberal democrats out there. The front page of our union paper is a who's who of the most liberal democrats in the world. I don't vote for them, and most of the people I work with don't vote for them. And yet we continue to prosper just fine.

Don't be superficial enough to think this means I approve of everything George Bush does or that I believe the Republicans are much better than the Democrats. It is more a case of voting for the lessor of two evils.
 
a liberal is someone who doesn't seek to impose their morals on someone else and expects the same
Click to expand...

Because liberals are constantly forcing their "morals" on everyone through legislation and activist court rulings.

Nearly all gun control legislation is promoted and passed by democrats. We are all forced to pay into the ponzi scheme of social security. A minor cannot be given an aspirin without a parents permission, but should be able to get an abortion without that parent even knowing according to the liberal/left. They stifle free speech with their so-called "hate speech" codes, hate speech being anything that challenges the liberal/left agenda. Rather then accept the principle that we're all equal under the law, they make certain "victim" classes who are more equal then others. Democrats champion class warfare, public schools that graduate illiterates, and quotas which breed incompetence. They think punishing success and rewarding failure is a grand idea. Three trillion dollars have been spent on the liberal's "war on poverty", not only has that not made any difference, but they want even more. Look at any poverty-stricken urban center, and you'll find a place where democrats have ruled for decades.

Not to mention the liberal leaders - Kennedy, Kerry, Schumer, Pelosi, Clinton, Byrd, Frank, Dean, Gore, the list goes on. Their names alone give anyone who cares about the RTBA and liberty nightmares.

And look at how liberals paint us, the law-abiding gun owners. We're portrayed as rednecks, ignorant and dangerous, mindless zombies bowing to Rush's will. Nothing said here comes close to the vitrolic hatred spewed on gun owners and non-liberals on DU or moveon.org.

Perhaps not every democrat is against gun rights, pro-gun liberals are few and far between. But every liberal is, by definition, someone who wants bigger government, more social engineering at taxpayer expense, and fewer freedoms, all "for the children" of course.
 
G'Day Holly - I'm an Australian so the words 'Liberal' and 'Democrat' over here have a silghtly different meaning (both are the names of political parties.)

We tend to view people who call themselves 'liberal' as being soft on crime and punishment, trendy and loose on public morality, easygoing on school performance, lax about immigration, liberal in giving handouts of public money to dubious causes and a million and one other things that smack of appeasment and compromise - gutless is a word that comes to mind.
I have no doubt that there are many well-intentioned liberals about but that's no antidote to those who bray and pirouette on the public stage.

As to Democrats - You will need to have this explained by a fellow American.
All I can say, as a shooter, is that the Democrats seem to be in favor of more gun laws and restrictions. It is their liberal nature I think. Although they appear to have been quiet lately, because of the electoral unpopularity of gun restriction, there is enough evidence from the recent past to suggest that if ever they had the opportunity they would take it.

That's why 'liberal and democrat' sounds a warning bell with me.

Oh, and by the way - Do you understand the term "Conservative Monolith?'
You are standing on it here.
 
Rich Lucibella said:
Personally, I think we should turn a bimd eye to party affiliation. Politicians should be branded based on their actions and statements regarding personal liberties, personal responsibilities and personal rights in the face of a monolithic government weight on all of the above.
Click to expand...
Rich, I agree... it can be something of a struggle, since there is so much solidarity in partisanship and so much convenience in overgeneralizing when we are opposed to someone else's stance on a given issue. But the right thing to do is often the more difficult thing, and it is only right (if difficult) to be thorough, rather than dismissive, in our assertions of others. We should do our very best to see people for who they are, and not be so quick to classify them according to our own abstractions, because most people aren't usually stark representatives of one extreme or the other (though I grant that a certain percentage are); they usually fall along a continuum somewhere.

In the end, labels are just labels. What's substantial, at least what should be substantial in a forum like this, is how a person feels about personal liberties, for themselves as well as for others.
 
Foreword : I consider myself basically a libertarian. Being a libertarian generally implies a good deal of agreement with Conservatives on a number of issues. But as I've grown older, I've realized that the most clear definition of libertarian I can give, is, anti-liberal.

People like to throw around the whole "conservative Christians want to regulate my morals". This gets hurled around by all the lefties where I work but I have yet to find a single actual shred of evidence that there's a "theocracy" at work. Seriously - where is it? I find this completely silly because outside of some sexual hangups, and illegal drugs, I cannot think of a single thing that conservatives actively shove down your throat via endless legislation.

Quite the contrary, liberalism seems to be alllllll about regulating people. Gun-control is a fantastic microcosm of the overall liberal mindset. You know the old saying "gun control isn't about guns - it's about control" ? It's true. Smoking bans, "hate speech" laws, gun control, affirmative action - name your liberal cause. It always seems to boil down to the same thing - control over your life and even your thoughts. Perhaps more succinctly put:

The old Hillary Clinton chestnut "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good"

It is the ultimate abhorrence.

Socialism is all about structured control of society. From economics to morals to property, to....everything. It is the exact opposite of the concept of personal liberty, personal responsibility and "rugged individualism" that this country is founded upon.

I find no end of humor that the dictionary definition of liberal means "more". But the modern definition of liberal really means "less", unless you belong to the flavor-of-the-month protected group. That group never appears to be the one I am part of. It is all about making sure that what is legal for me today is illegal for me tomorrow because of liberal morals. Since I was not alive during prohibition, or the passing of marijuana laws, I am hard pressed to come up with something conservatives have ever done during my lifetime that does this.

So yes, it is an epithet when used in reference to the modern definition of "liberal".
 
The problem is that people tend to dislike those who don't agree with them. In order to show their disapproval they use perjoratives against those they have issues with. It's not the words used but rather the sentiment behind the words that counts. Which is why liberal and democrat as well as others get used so much in such bad context.

Who do you think is pushing the anti-gun agenda ?
It certainly isn't the conservative right wing
Click to expand...

Who do you think is pushing the anti-science agenda? it certainly isn't the liberals.

See, the argument can be twisted against anyone and any party because both parties are equally screwed up by extremists pushing a private agenda. One in which they come out on top and everyone else is subservient. Using their tactics reinforces their whole agenda and skews the system against the rest of us.

Personally I think that political forums like this are wonderful. The give and take of the debate can get heated and I have been guilty of that at least once on this board. (we NEED a "delete post" button). However, without the ability to speak and form opinions, even poor opinions, one never gets the whole story. Without the whole story one cannot be independent of those who would enslave us to their brand of reality truth notwithstanding.

Yes, there are some here who sling the insults repeatedly against those of differing values. However, with time and the ability to reason with them through this forum there's hope they can be saved from themselves. Not much hope, but hope nonetheless.

Of course, I'm the worst of both worlds... a liberal Republican (could there actually BE such a thing?) and I see the world a little bit differently than most.
 
mxwelch

Not all Democrats are flaming liberals.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true... that's why so many Democrats have deserted the party.

The problem with being a Democrat is that you're so close to Liberals that you begin to smell like them...

I can't get past the smell... :D

Liberals are defined as Jesse Jacksons, Jimmy Carters, Al Sharptons and Ted Kennedys.

Democrats are defineable as John Kennedys, Zell Millers,
and ____ Leibowitzs.

If you cannot see the difference between these two lists...
Then you are a Liberal... :D :D :D
 
Last edited:
No flaming here, I'm sure that will come from others. I'd just say that from my experience in the political arena, the most rabid anti 2nd amendment comes from the liberal Democrat side of the aisle. I will say that I do some some D's here in PA who are quite conservative and have A+ ratings from the NRA. These are D's from the rural area of the state and reflect their constituency. That said, the liberal D's from the urban areas (Philly, Pittsburgh and their suburbs) are committed to the concept that disarming law abiding citizens will end criminal gun violence. Well, that clearly is a nonsensical concept. If you don't understand the politics of gun ownership and those who oppose it you are, at best, woefully naive. And yes, I do know R's from the Philly suburbs who are weak on gun issues, but even those tend not to be frothing about it.
As far as your reference to "shooting sports", the 2nd Amendment was not established for sport, it was the fundamental right of every citizen to self protection and the fact that we, the people, grant power to the government as opposed to the government granting us rights.
 
I stopped referring to the various flavors of leftists (including Democrats) as being "Liberal" several years ago, when I stopped to consider just what it means to be truely "Liberal". Real Liberals are not Leftists, and Leftists are not Real Liberals, even though on a social level there are some areas of overlap.

In general, true Liberals -- Classical Liberals -- are more akin to Libertarians -- proponents of Liberty, Personal Responsibility and Limited Government. Leftists may make lip service to some aspects of Liberty, but usually stand opposed to increased Personal Responsibility (except for ever increasing tax liabilities) and stand diametrically opposed to the concept of Limited Government. True Liberals support lowering (or in extreme cases completely eliminating) taxation, which Leftists stand directly opposed to. True Liberals seek to decentralize what government is required, Leftists seek to concentrate that power at the highest levels.

In short, it seems that the historic term "Liberal" has been largely hijacked by the Left, who claim to the title and yet show very little of the attributes of REAL Liberalism. I do not hold REAL Liberals in contempt, but I do hold Leftists in contempt.

I hold Democrats in contempt because, well, they are contemptable. They seek to increase government control over just about all aspects of my life, and I resent that. Their elitism revolts me. They seek to increase my tax burden, and I resent that. They attempt to twist the plain language law of the land to mean that which it does not mean in order to suit their purposes, which I find tantamount to treasonous. When they are unable to obtain a popular mandate for their agenda (meaning, when they lose elections and don't have legislative majorities), they seek to do end runs around the will of the people by way of previously stacked courts. They seek to disarm me, and that makes me "Cold Rage MAD". The only things that I can agree with them on an ideological basis are those areas where they are attempting to actually promote aspects of Liberty, and those are so few and insignificant that they come nowhere near overcoming my revulsion with the remainder of their ideological platform.
Don't be superficial enough to think this means I approve of everything George Bush does or that I believe the Republicans are much better than the Democrats. It is more a case of voting for the lessor of two evils.
Click to expand...
+1. It isn't so much that I like the 'Pubs, but they are less repulsive than the 'Rats -- at least they pay lip service to Liberty, Personal Responsibility and Limited Government. If there were more Zell Millers in the 'Rats, that stance might change, but that isn't the case and won't be for the time being. I'd vote Libertarian, but I'm not that extreme, and besides that I did the math and determined that a Libertarian vote amounts to 1/2 vote for the 'Rats -- No, Thanks, I'll not do ANYTHING to help the 'Rats as I find them to be so repulsive.
 
Who do you think is pushing the anti-science agenda? it certainly isn't the liberals.
Click to expand...
Like refusing to offer intelligent design NEXT to evolution and letting students judge for themselves because evolution is just a theory?
 
Everyone 'cept Lucibella is, I think, dead-on target. The "Religious Right" (of which I am a proud member) is the 'tolerant' side in the most pure definition of the word. When the Christians I know meet someone who is a non-Christian, or one who does not have the same political views they do, they do not condemn them or brush them off. Adversely, when I tell Libs that I am either a Christian or a Conservative, they look at me like I have a disease; I don't care, it just flies in the face of their tolerance schpeal, which delights me to no end. Lastly, Michael Savage got it right: Liberals (as a whole) are 'the enemy within' and they do have a mental disorder: wanting to do away with the principles that this nation was built on; teaching six year old kids things about sex that they should find out on their honeymoon; sacrificing our national safety for ILLEGAL immigrants who work our system and do not necessarily contribute anything to our society; and mocking and openly accusing our soldiers in uniform putting their butts on the line every day to keep these sad sacks safe. (Remind me, why do we as a nation let this go on?) Now, the thing that really gets me is they have no qualms about doing these sick things.

On a separate note, who are the Libs going to turn to when the North Koreans invade (God forbid)? The military they helped to gut? Themselves and their 'reasoning' skills with terrorist fanatics? NO!!! The last bastion of 2nd Amendment integrity left standing... the "Religious Right" and their 'scary guns'. It would serve their own future well to leave us and our guns alone. When the Commies try a land attack on CONUS, the private gun owner is the second line of defense after the military (what is left of it after the Kennedy-grade Libs are done with it). (Some would say that gun owners are the FIRST line of defense, but the majority of that elitist militia schlock sounds a tad too Libertarian to me.) Just my $0.02.
 
Proof that gun control liberals think in a fairly irrational way (or maybe just dangerously shallow) : Ask your local liberal if they trust GWB/Republicans/Conservatives/Christians and you'll probably be treated to a diatribe of some kind. As them if they fear the mythical "theocracy" or draconian erosion of various liberties, and you'll get resounding yesses.

Then ask - why then, are you so keen to give the government the monopoly on the use of force? What are you going to do when the rights you have today to protest or speak openly of political dissent are dissolved? Shrug and say "oh well"?

You can't have it both ways, but the weird liberal mindset doesn't make this connection.

Another interesting tack is to ask "is there nothing worth fighting for"? Posit some arbitrarily ultra extreme - like everyone is literally in chains and working in the salt mines at the behest of some weird futuristic dystopian government - the old are used for Soylent Green - you have to take Soma - all the classic stuff :). Would you take up arms at that point? If so (likely, unless they're hopelessly insane), then logically it stands to reason that there is some line, somewhere between what we have now and that fictional extreme, where one will say "enough" and fight. Do they think it is impossible to actually reach this line? Even the briefest perusal of history will show you that it happens all the time. It can, does, and almost certainly will again happen. In our lifetime? Who knows. Probably not. But nonetheless, it's almost a certainty. What do you plan to do when all you've got left is sharp sticks and rocks to the "gubbermints" SWAT teams and tanks?
 
Are you republican folk unable to objectively look at your own party? Im thinking alot of you havent the slightest clue what theyre up to.

They support your right to bear arms, and thats all that seems to matter. I know this is a gun board, but just about every point brought up aside from gun rights is ludacris. Your republican party of today is not the republican party of yesterday. You all talk about the "left" and the "democrats" forcing their morals, and opinions onto you. You talk about the "democrats" being all about big government. Majority of you seem to think its completely one sided. WAKE UP.

I think only maybe 2 or 3 of the 20 or so posts mentioned it. Some of these posts were downright painful to read. It baffles me to see people like gun owners that are under constant persecution being so one-sided and ignorant.



Im a "liberal" gun owner, and proud to say so. I despise the fact that people lump me into the "conservative" crowd when people find out that I hunt, and am an active shooter and self defense buff. I think the majority of you are selfish, spiteful, intolerant, hateful cowards.

Have a nice day :)
 
Not every Democrat is an enemy of gun rights.
Painting all liberals and Democrats as such is unfair
Click to expand...
Really?
How about we start a list of "gun control" laws sponsored by Democrats, and one sponsored by Republicans and see which one is longer?

The "Taxenbanners" aka: The Democrats come out way ahead (behind?) on that one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top