Sucks to be a conservative.

Miramonti · Dec 19, 2003

LOL

That's such a liberal site!

DealMonkey · Dec 19, 2003

Pffft - dontcha know that the dictionary.com site is run by Hillary herself?!? Geeeze.

CADsortaGUY · Dec 19, 2003

Conservative
Entry: conservative
Function: adjective
Definition: moderate
Synonyms: bourgeois, cautious, constant, controlled, conventional, die-hard, fearful, firm, fogyish, fuddy-duddy, guarded, hard hat, hidebound, holding to, illiberal, inflexible, middle-of-the-road, not extreme, obstinate, old guard, old-line, orthodox, quiet, red-neck, right, right-wing, sober, stable, steady, timid, traditional, traditionalistic, unchangeable, unchanging, uncreative, undaring, unimaginative, unprogressive, white bread
Antonyms: incautious, left-wing, liberal, progressive, radical, revolutionary
Concept: personality quality

CkG

CADsortaGUY · Dec 19, 2003

Originally posted by: Zebo
Haha CAD I see you choose the adjective...good for you since much less damning than the noun.

Entry: liberal
Function: adjective
Definition: progressive
Synonyms: advanced, avant-garde, big, broad, broad-minded, catholic, detached, disinterested, dispassionate, enlightened, flexible, free, general, high-minded, humanistic, humanitarian, impartial, indulgent, inexact, intelligent, interested, latitudinarian, left, lenient, libertarian, loose, magnanimous, not close, not literal, not strict, permissive, pink, radical, rational, reasonable, receiving, receptive, reformist, tolerant, unbiased, unbigoted, unconventional, understanding, unorthodox, unprejudiced
Concept: freedom

I contemplated posting that one but you also posted an adjective - so I figured it would be better to compare apples to apples

CkG

heartsurgeon · Dec 20, 2003

lets try this word:

TREASON
n 1: a crime that undermines the offender's government [syn: high treason, lese majesty] 2: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior [syn: subversiveness, traitorousness] 3: an act of deliberate betrayal [syn: treachery, betrayal, perfidy]
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

or how about
SLANDER
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone

Insane3D · Dec 20, 2003

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
lets try this word:

TREASON
n 1: a crime that undermines the offender's government [syn: high treason, lese majesty] 2: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior [syn: subversiveness, traitorousness] 3: an act of deliberate betrayal [syn: treachery, betrayal, perfidy]
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

or how about
SLANDER
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone

Yep...that nails it...heartsurgeon is obviously Ann Coulter in disguise. Same old Coulter-style tripe...

thomsbrain · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
lets try this word:

TREASON
n 1: a crime that undermines the offender's government [syn: high treason, lese majesty] 2: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior [syn: subversiveness, traitorousness] 3: an act of deliberate betrayal [syn: treachery, betrayal, perfidy]
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

or how about
SLANDER
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone

i guess anyone who wanted to impeach clinton was guilty of treason...

Moonbeam · Dec 22, 2003

Conservatism is terrific. It requires so little thinking.

Moonbeam · Dec 22, 2003

Ditto that, Moonbeam

tokarev · Dec 22, 2003

Using a dictionary to attempt to define a political ideal is nothing more than a word game.

According to a recent study by Gallup, the single thing that best serves to separate people who call themselves liberal from those who call themselves conservatives is trust in the government. Liberals trust the government while conservatives do not. It makes sense, if you think about it. Liberals tend to support things that empower the government. Conservatives tend to support things that empower the private sector. Either way, the middle class gets screwed. The little guy is a slave to the aristocrats or the bureaucrats; take your pick.

xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx · Dec 22, 2003

I have to admit...it does suck being conservative and feeling like I have to work for a living and accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America (wal-mart) and others in society for my shortcomings. Yes, it does suck?but millions of Americans are counting on me!

Bowfinger · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
lets try this word:

TREASON
n 1: a crime that undermines the offender's government [syn: high treason, lese majesty] 2: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior [syn: subversiveness, traitorousness] 3: an act of deliberate betrayal [syn: treachery, betrayal, perfidy]
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

or how about
SLANDER
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone

SHEEP
n 3. a. A person regarded as timid, weak, or submissive. b. One who is easily swayed or led.

Bowfinger · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I have to admit...it does suck being conservative and feeling like I have to work for a living and accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America (wal-mart) and others in society for my shortcomings. Yes, it does suck?but millions of Americans are counting on me!

Sorry, I'd have to apply the sheep label to you too. In the first place, this administration and the Republican leadership wouldn't recognize personal responsibility if it bit them in the muttonchops. They are the poster children for blaming others. Of course they have no shortcomings in their minds, so I'm sure they don't think it's their fault.

Second, there's all the difference in the world between blaming others for one's achievements or lack thereof, and recognizing very real issues and inequities around companies like Wal-Mart. To deny this is to pretend the system is perfect, an obvious untruth. Only the blindest of the sheep will claim there are no examples of corporate excess in America.

I have no personal stake in Wal-Mart's proliferation. I do not compete with them, even indirectly; I have no family put out of work by them; I even have a cousin who is moderately well up their corporate management chain. Nonetheless, as an American concerned about this country's future, I recognize Wal-Mart has done and continues to do a lot of damage.

You try to deflect valid criticism of corporate America by slandering the critic. How about you get off your lazy butt and address the issues instead? It's easy to dismiss my concerns by saying I should "accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America", but that is dishonest, or at least incredibly ignorant. Then again, that kind of "blame the messenger" mentality seems to have become a trademark of today's pseudo-conservatives.

xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

How about you get off your lazy butt and address the issues instead? It's easy to dismiss my concerns by saying I should "accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America", but that is dishonest, or at least incredibly ignorant. Then again, that kind of "blame the messenger" mentality seems to have become a trademark of today's pseudo-conservatives.

Who said YOU should accept personal responsibility for your actions? I don't remember mentioning your name in my aforementioned post....maybe I did subliminally and you feel offended. If that is the case, i am sorry.

Oh, and add that it's tough to be a conservative today because we don't feel a need to attack others who hold contrarian views and do not think they way we do....forgot to add that to my list. God I love Wal-Mart.

xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx · Dec 22, 2003

double-post...

CADsortaGUY · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
lets try this word:

TREASON
n 1: a crime that undermines the offender's government [syn: high treason, lese majesty] 2: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior [syn: subversiveness, traitorousness] 3: an act of deliberate betrayal [syn: treachery, betrayal, perfidy]
Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

or how about
SLANDER
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone

Click to expand...

SHEEP
n 3. a. A person regarded as timid, weak, or submissive. b. One who is easily swayed or led.

Which is exactly what big gov't hopes people are or become. The gov't feeds this way of thinking by telling people that the gov't can solve their ills and that the gov't will provide for everyone. I've tried to get this accross before but people don't seem to understand(or just don't want to) the damage caused by this "entitlement" thinking. The more you "expect" from them - the more they are going to take from you, and that isn't just in terms of money/wealth. For all the people who keep whining about how much they think GWB has limited their "freedom" - ask yourself what you are doing to keep yourself free from gov't control. Think about that when you are at the voting booth - who is going to make you more dependant on the gov't? Who is promising to create big broad entitlements(UHC) and make other's bigger(medicare) and more intrusive?
Someday people will wake up and realize that the gov't really isn't the answer to their ills...I just hope enough realize it before it's too late.

Just a note from a man who served his country well:
"Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last."
- Ronald Reagan, Address to the nation, October 27, 1964

CkG

HeroOfPellinor · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Conservatism is terrific. It requires so little thinking.

That's actually funny you mention that. Conservatism requires either very little thinking or very complex thinking. It's liberalism that appeals to the mediocre minds.

HeroOfPellinor · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I have to admit...it does suck being conservative and feeling like I have to work for a living and accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America (wal-mart) and others in society for my shortcomings. Yes, it does suck?but millions of Americans are counting on me!

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'd have to apply the sheep label to you too. In the first place, this administration and the Republican leadership wouldn't recognize personal responsibility if it bit them in the muttonchops. They are the poster children for blaming others. Of course they have no shortcomings in their minds, so I'm sure they don't think it's their fault.

Second, there's all the difference in the world between blaming others for one's achievements or lack thereof, and recognizing very real issues and inequities around companies like Wal-Mart. To deny this is to pretend the system is perfect, an obvious untruth. Only the blindest of the sheep will claim there are no examples of corporate excess in America.

I have no personal stake in Wal-Mart's proliferation. I do not compete with them, even indirectly; I have no family put out of work by them; I even have a cousin who is moderately well up their corporate management chain. Nonetheless, as an American concerned about this country's future, I recognize Wal-Mart has done and continues to do a lot of damage.

You try to deflect valid criticism of corporate America by slandering the critic. How about you get off your lazy butt and address the issues instead? It's easy to dismiss my concerns by saying I should "accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America", but that is dishonest, or at least incredibly ignorant. Then again, that kind of "blame the messenger" mentality seems to have become a trademark of today's pseudo-conservatives.

Conjecture

Some day you'll get it. Some day.

Bowfinger · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Oh, and add that it's tough to be a conservative today because we don't feel a need to attack others who hold contrarian views and do not think they way we do....forgot to add that to my list. God I love Wal-Mart.

LOL! Today's "conservatives" are the first to attack people who hold contrarian views. "You're either with us or you support terrrorism." Remember that little chant for months and months? I do. How about Coulter's "Treason" slurs?

I see that as one of the advantages of being a conservative. You feel free to take you own reprehensible behaviors and preemptively turn them around as attacks against the left. That's where you get your claims of "fiscal irresponsibility", "refusing to accept personal responsibility", "liberal media", "restoring integrity to the White House", and "attack[ing] others who hold contrarian views." They are exactly backwards from reality.

Bowfinger · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I have to admit...it does suck being conservative and feeling like I have to work for a living and accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America (wal-mart) and others in society for my shortcomings. Yes, it does suck?but millions of Americans are counting on me!

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'd have to apply the sheep label to you too. In the first place, this administration and the Republican leadership wouldn't recognize personal responsibility if it bit them in the muttonchops. They are the poster children for blaming others. Of course they have no shortcomings in their minds, so I'm sure they don't think it's their fault.

Second, there's all the difference in the world between blaming others for one's achievements or lack thereof, and recognizing very real issues and inequities around companies like Wal-Mart. To deny this is to pretend the system is perfect, an obvious untruth. Only the blindest of the sheep will claim there are no examples of corporate excess in America.

I have no personal stake in Wal-Mart's proliferation. I do not compete with them, even indirectly; I have no family put out of work by them; I even have a cousin who is moderately well up their corporate management chain. Nonetheless, as an American concerned about this country's future, I recognize Wal-Mart has done and continues to do a lot of damage.

You try to deflect valid criticism of corporate America by slandering the critic. How about you get off your lazy butt and address the issues instead? It's easy to dismiss my concerns by saying I should "accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America", but that is dishonest, or at least incredibly ignorant. Then again, that kind of "blame the messenger" mentality seems to have become a trademark of today's pseudo-conservatives.

Click to expand...

Conjecture

Some day you'll get it. Some day.

Goodie, you know how to link. Now you might want to read the defintion and explain how you think it applies to my comments. It should be most amusing.

While you're at it, here's a word for you: clue. I'm not nearly as optimistic about your prospects.

HeroOfPellinor · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I have to admit...it does suck being conservative and feeling like I have to work for a living and accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America (wal-mart) and others in society for my shortcomings. Yes, it does suck?but millions of Americans are counting on me!

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'd have to apply the sheep label to you too. In the first place, this administration and the Republican leadership wouldn't recognize personal responsibility if it bit them in the muttonchops. They are the poster children for blaming others. Of course they have no shortcomings in their minds, so I'm sure they don't think it's their fault.

Second, there's all the difference in the world between blaming others for one's achievements or lack thereof, and recognizing very real issues and inequities around companies like Wal-Mart. To deny this is to pretend the system is perfect, an obvious untruth. Only the blindest of the sheep will claim there are no examples of corporate excess in America.

I have no personal stake in Wal-Mart's proliferation. I do not compete with them, even indirectly; I have no family put out of work by them; I even have a cousin who is moderately well up their corporate management chain. Nonetheless, as an American concerned about this country's future, I recognize Wal-Mart has done and continues to do a lot of damage.

You try to deflect valid criticism of corporate America by slandering the critic. How about you get off your lazy butt and address the issues instead? It's easy to dismiss my concerns by saying I should "accept personal responsibility for my actions, as opposed to blaming corporate America", but that is dishonest, or at least incredibly ignorant. Then again, that kind of "blame the messenger" mentality seems to have become a trademark of today's pseudo-conservatives.

Click to expand...

Conjecture

Some day you'll get it. Some day.

Click to expand...

Goodie, you know how to link. Now you might want to read the defintion and explain how you think it applies to my comments. It should be most amusing.

While you're at it, here's a word for you: clue. I'm not nearly as optimistic about your prospects.

I'm not gonna do the job your sixth grade teachers should have done.

xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Goodie, you know how to link. Now you might want to read the defintion and explain how you think it applies to my comments. It should be most amusing.

While you're at it, here's a word for you: clue. I'm not nearly as optimistic about your prospects.

"YOU" sure like to use the word "YOU" in most of "YOU"r posts! In MY first most, I used "I"
and "Me"....funny how that works.

Bowfinger · Dec 22, 2003

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I'm not gonna do the job your sixth grade teachers should have done.

Nice cop-out. Sure beats exposing your ignorant use of the word "conjecture".

Sucks to be a conservative.

Elite Member

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Elite Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Elite Member

Lifer

Elite Member

Elite Member

Junior Member

Banned

Lifer

Lifer

Banned

Banned

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Banned

Lifer

ASK THE COMMUNITY