In a country built on the rule of law one cannot have different laws, or restrict access to resources, institutions, or freedoms to any group based on gender, religious beliefs, ethnicity, or sexual orientation, whether we agree with people who are different than us or not. That's what civil rights are. Restricting those rights is being on the wrong side of the issue, in my opinion. Disagreeing with me is not intolerant; me denigrating you personally for your opinion is.

Yes, and liberals should also keep quiet and respect the opinions of the KKK too I guess. If a liberal criticizes the KKK, they are hypocrites.

Yup, nothing says intolerant like criticizing the Nazis for the Holocaust. One mustn't criticize others views that are different than yours, otherwise you are nothing but a hypicrite. Got it!

Right. But issues like same sex marriage, Obamacare, immigration, who pays for birth control, or climate change are a different animal. If you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman Liberals say you hate gays. If you don't support Obamacare Liberals call you a racist.

If you want secure borders and an orderly process to gain citizenship Liberals say you hate minorities. If you object to public financing of birth control Liberals say you hate women. If you are skeptic of man-made climate change Liberals say you hate science and want dirty air and dirty water. The list goes on.......

Sorry, but this kind of BS doesn't lend itself to the idea that Liberals are very tolerant, and that feeling is entirely self-imposed.

As an anti-war Progressive I have to tolerate people who think it it is OK to kill innocent Muslim women and children with drone strikes. They are in power, both Democrat and Republican. What can I do?

But in a bar? If some guy starts mouthing off about his pride in my tax dollars killing babies in Syria, I'm not going to sit quietly.

If that same guy is smoking and blowing smoke in my direction, I ask him to stop, he continues... I'm not going to tolerate him poisoning my air.

I"m not going to tolerate oil spills and corporations poisoning the planet.

I'm not going to tolerate people who slut shame women for using birth control and ignore the many medical uses of birth control so they can legislate morality.

In fact, I'm not tolerant of anyone who thinks they should legislate morality.

I've been a liberal all my life and there is a lot I will not tolerate. And far too much that I have to tolerate.

Yes, and liberals should also keep quiet and respect the opinions of the KKK too I guess. If a liberal criticizes the KKK, they are hypocrites.

Yup, nothing says intolerant like criticizing the Nazis for the Holocaust. One mustn't criticize others views that are different than yours, otherwise you are nothing but a hypicrite. Got it!

Right. But issues like same sex marriage, Obamacare, immigration, who pays for birth control, or climate change are a different animal. If you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman Liberals say you hate gays. If you don't support Obamacare Liberals call you a racist.

If you want secure borders and an orderly process to gain citizenship Liberals say you hate minorities. If you object to public financing of birth control Liberals say you hate women. If you are skeptic of man-made climate change Liberals say you hate science and want dirty air and dirty water. The list goes on.......

Sorry, but this kind of BS doesn't lend itself to the idea that Liberals are very tolerant, and that feeling is entirely self-imposed.

Although I would agree with you that I think some Obama supporters call people racist far too often for disagreeing with him, the whole idea of intolerance is that people being treated different for who they area is wrong. Just because YOUR religion says that gay marriage is wrong doesn't mean other religions believe that. There is no official religion in the US, so therefore no religion should be able to dictate public policy any more than any other religion. So denying rights to somebody is wrong and intolerant. If your religion says gay marriage is wrong, then by all means don't have one. But that doesn't mean others shouldn't have that right. Nobody is keeping you from worshiping the way you want or living your life the way that you want, so to impose your beliefs on others is intolerant. As far as illegal immigration and such, I don't think securing the border and modifying immigration laws is racist, as long as it's done in an even handed way. But, stopping and shouting at busses full of children doesn't exactly sound very tolerant to me.

Yes, and liberals should also keep quiet and respect the opinions of the KKK too I guess. If a liberal criticizes the KKK, they are hypocrites.

Yup, nothing says intolerant like criticizing the Nazis for the Holocaust. One mustn't criticize others views that are different than yours, otherwise you are nothing but a hypicrite. Got it!

Right. But issues like same sex marriage, Obamacare, immigration, who pays for birth control, or climate change are a different animal. If you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman Liberals say you hate gays. If you don't support Obamacare Liberals call you a racist.

If you want secure borders and an orderly process to gain citizenship Liberals say you hate minorities. If you object to public financing of birth control Liberals say you hate women. If you are skeptic of man-made climate change Liberals say you hate science and want dirty air and dirty water. The list goes on.......

Sorry, but this kind of BS doesn't lend itself to the idea that Liberals are very tolerant, and that feeling is entirely self-imposed.

Although I would agree with you that I think some Obama supporters call people racist far too often for disagreeing with him, the whole idea of intolerance is that people being treated different for who they area is wrong. Just because YOUR religion says that gay marriage is wrong doesn't mean other religions believe that. There is no official religion in the US, so therefore no religion should be able to dictate public policy any more than any other religion. So denying rights to somebody is wrong and intolerant. If your religion says gay marriage is wrong, then by all means don't have one. But that doesn't mean others shouldn't have that right. Nobody is keeping you from worshiping the way you want or living your life the way that you want, so to impose your beliefs on others is intolerant. As far as illegal immigration and such, I don't think securing the border and modifying immigration laws is racist, as long as it's done in an even handed way. But, stopping and shouting at busses full of children doesn't exactly sound very tolerant to me.

Fair enough. But Imho, the right does not preach tolerance.

If you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman Liberals say you hate gays.

Not true.

If you don't support Obamacare Liberals call you a racist.

Not true.

If you want secure borders and an orderly process to gain citizenship Liberals say you hate minorities.

Not true.

If you object to public financing of birth control Liberals say you hate women.

Not true.

If you are skeptic of man-made climate change Liberals say you hate science and want dirty air and dirty water.

Not true.

I know these things are not true because I know lots of people who identify themselves as liberals who do not say them.

[Edited on 10/13/2014 by gondicar]

I don't think the "liberals" of the 60's were "tolerant". They protested to end the war, to gain civil rights for minorities and women, they protested to clean up the environment.

I'd say it was liberal intolerance that changed much of the country's thinking in the 60's.

If you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman Liberals say you hate gays.

Not true.

If you don't support Obamacare Liberals call you a racist.

Not true.

If you want secure borders and an orderly process to gain citizenship Liberals say you hate minorities.

Not true.

If you object to public financing of birth control Liberals say you hate women.

Not true.

If you are skeptic of man-made climate change Liberals say you hate science and want dirty air and dirty water.

Not true.

I know these things are not true because I know lots of people who identify themselves as liberals who do not say them.

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

I don't think the "liberals" of the 60's were "tolerant". They protested to end the war, to gain civil rights for minorities and women, they protested to clean up the environment.

I'd say it was liberal intolerance that changed much of the country's thinking in the 60's.

Fifty years ago, this was probably very true. Now, the question is:

"Which segment of the populace preaches tolerance...the left, or the right"?

So, out of curiousness...

If you don't "preach tolerance," then you can say anything you want, no matter how vile, and that's just fine?

There's no one on the right that says anything bad about anyone, ever?

So, out of curiousness...

If you don't "preach tolerance," then you can say anything you want, no matter how vile, and that's just fine?

There's no one on the right that says anything bad about anyone, ever?

Not at all. Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes. It just comes off to me as more hypocrisy from the left. Practice what you preach.

Being tolerant doesn't mean you lay down when being denigrated. Being told that gays should be denied a constitutional right is denigration, not "just offering an opinion".

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes.

No need to do the homework, because you already answered figured it out. The a-holes are not exclusive to the left or the right.

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes.

No need to do the homework, because you already answered figured it out. The a-holes are not exclusive to the left or the right.

Fair enough.

Which side actively preaches the need for tolerance?

So, out of curiousness...

If you don't "preach tolerance," then you can say anything you want, no matter how vile, and that's just fine?

There's no one on the right that says anything bad about anyone, ever?

Not at all. Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes. It just comes off to me as more hypocrisy from the left. Practice what you preach.

Well, I've never known where the tolerant standard label came from, so, oh well. Thanks for the answer.

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes.

No need to do the homework, because you already answered figured it out. The a-holes are not exclusive to the left or the right.

Fair enough.

Which side actively preaches the need for tolerance?

Both do.

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes.

No need to do the homework, because you already answered figured it out. The a-holes are not exclusive to the left or the right.

Fair enough.

Which side actively preaches the need for tolerance?

Both do.

Look at it from another angle. Which side offers up legislation, party platform, and political advertisements that would be considered intolerant or narrow minded & less than inclusive in scope?

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes.

No need to do the homework, because you already answered figured it out. The a-holes are not exclusive to the left or the right.

Fair enough.

Which side actively preaches the need for tolerance?

Both do.

I disagree. And that's cool.

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Both the right and left have their equal share of A**holes.

No need to do the homework, because you already answered figured it out. The a-holes are not exclusive to the left or the right.

Fair enough.

Which side actively preaches the need for tolerance?

Both do.

I disagree. And that's cool.

quote:
I don't think the "liberals" of the 60's were "tolerant". They protested to end the war, to gain civil rights for minorities and women, they protested to clean up the environment.

I'd say it was liberal intolerance that changed much of the country's thinking in the 60's.

Fifty years ago, this was probably very true. Now, the question is:

"Which segment of the populace preaches tolerance...the left, or the right"?

I don't think supporting gay marriage is a tolerance issue. I think it is a civil rights issue.

Frankly I don't know who is preaching "tolerance". Could you give me some examples BigV? I'm not fighting here, I'd just like to see your point. I'm not very tolerant or politically correct yet I'm far left on nearly every issue.

Haha!....Homework assignment:

A) Post any of these beliefs, "If you"....on any social media outlet, FB, twitter, whatever
B) Sit back and wait for the vitriol
C) Report back about all of the love

Be prepared to have alloak post something snarky because of this...... 😛

Funny how people see things differently. I, and many others, didn't see them as moderate at all. They came off as staunch conservatives to me.

Take it from a staunch Conservative.....No.

They will eventually see Christie as a staunch conservative as well. Hell, many see Obama as a moderate Republican. It all depends where you are starting from.

Yes, I do believe there is a massive liberal movement going on right now. There is lots of evidence to support it. Obama's 2 victories is the first example. Gay rights has won in recent years. Anyone opposed to gay marriage, or guilty of gay bashing is ridiculed and labeled an endangered species bigot. Pot is slowly becoming accepted and legal all over the country. Then the media/public outrage over stories like Paula Dean, Donald Sterling, the NFL, and dozens of other people who've had to apologize for non-PC comments is the norm. The right doesn't support the above, at least not among the pundits and talk show hosts.

When it comes to civil liberty issues the country, including, naturally, conservatives, have grown consistently more liberal for the past half century. When it comes to the issues that define today's "liberalism", attacking profit and resource and income re-distribution, the country is certainly not moving to the left. Saying Obama's two victories is a sign of a vast lberal movement is like saying Bush's two elections were the opposite. As I noted above every partisan thinks the signs are there for massive sweeping victory for their point of view. They are inevitably wrong. I remember when Clinton was elected in 92. I was so excited I thought he had created a permanent Democratic majority by embracing the centrism of the Democratic Leadership Council. Two years later the Republicans took over Congress.

I hope not Doug. If liberals accuse them of selling out, I'd be upset because i hope the liberals would show more class and maturity than that. If they do change their stance on social issues, I hope it's viewed by everyone as evolution of society. That's why I like Christie. When I watched his recent debate, he was asked about gay marriage, and he talked about his full respect for the gay community, and while he believes it should be between a man and a woman, he vowed to let the people of NJ decide. He never brought religion into his answer, which shows his ability to separate church and state. I can't ask for anything more than that out of a politician.

Class and maturity? I certainly wouldn't count on that if I were you. What I would count on is Democrats attempting to tar each and every opponent as a radical right winger up until the very day the tactic no longer works. I would expect the same thing in reverse from Republicans as they did until it stopped working in 1992.

He didn't state an opposing view. He said it was wrong. Do you understand the difference?

You are incorrect. Saying something is wrong IS a view. Saying the person is bad or evil for holding the view is what shuts down the debate, a tactic Democrats have been honing for a while now. If I think Affirmative Action is wrong and should not be adopted as policy, that is my view. Your view might be that it is good and should be adopted. I might say it's morally wrong and unfair or I might say that it is a divisive policy that will be ineffective. Either way I have opened up debate not shut it down. If you say "You oppose it because you are racist" that is shutting debate down. That is a tactic you have used in this very forum many times. Do you see the difference?

However, I believe that health problems will be the culprit. I think her health problems are worse than they're letting on. Could be right or could be wrong, just a gut feeling on my part.

Forgive me, but I can't recall any presidential candidate since WWII who chose not to run for health reasons. I don't claim any expertise here, but when has that happened? Muskie was dropped from the ticket as VP because his willingness to seek medical treatment for clinical depression was considered a liability.

Point of correction, that was Thomas Eagleton. Muskie was his replacement.

Yes, and liberals should also keep quiet and respect the opinions of the KKK too I guess. If a liberal criticizes the KKK, they are hypocrites.

Yup, nothing says intolerant like criticizing the Nazis for the Holocaust. One mustn't criticize others views that are different than yours, otherwise you are nothing but a hypicrite. Got it!

Right. But issues like same sex marriage, Obamacare, immigration, who pays for birth control, or climate change are a different animal. If you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman Liberals say you hate gays. If you don't support Obamacare Liberals call you a racist.

If you want secure borders and an orderly process to gain citizenship Liberals say you hate minorities. If you object to public financing of birth control Liberals say you hate women. If you are skeptic of man-made climate change Liberals say you hate science and want dirty air and dirty water. The list goes on.......

Sorry, but this kind of BS doesn't lend itself to the idea that Liberals are very tolerant, and that feeling is entirely self-imposed.

They should call it "illiberalism" because that's what it has become. Now you will get the folks saying "Oh I have to tolerate Nazis and the KKK" thereby clearly implying that there is NO legitimate opposition because to oppose them is to be like the KKK or Nazis. Wait for it.

He didn't state an opposing view. He said it was wrong. Do you understand the difference?

You are incorrect. Saying something is wrong IS a view. Saying the person is bad or evil for holding the view is what shuts down the debate, a tactic Democrats have been honing for a while now. If I think Affirmative Action is wrong and should not be adopted as policy, that is my view. Your view might be that it is good and should be adopted. I might say it's morally wrong and unfair or I might say that it is a divisive policy that will be ineffective. Either way I have opened up debate not shut it down. If you say "You oppose it because you are racist" that is shutting debate down. That is a tactic you have used in this very forum many times. Do you see the difference?

How does it differ from you accusing people of Anti-Semitism?

He didn't state an opposing view. He said it was wrong. Do you understand the difference?

You are incorrect. Saying something is wrong IS a view. Saying the person is bad or evil for holding the view is what shuts down the debate, a tactic Democrats have been honing for a while now. If I think Affirmative Action is wrong and should not be adopted as policy, that is my view. Your view might be that it is good and should be adopted. I might say it's morally wrong and unfair or I might say that it is a divisive policy that will be ineffective. Either way I have opened up debate not shut it down. If you say "You oppose it because you are racist" that is shutting debate down. That is a tactic you have used in this very forum many times. Do you see the difference?

Hold on, though. At that point you have a person who claims you are a racist when you know you are not, and if he basically walks away from you, who is the loser in the exchange?

You seem and always have seemed to hold those you label as "leftist" in very poor regard. Why would an outrageous claim of racism from such a person even bother you? Rejection of "debate?" Really?

Can one side really claim some high moral ground with political rhetoric? I saw a classic post from someone on FB not too long ago..."All you idiot liberals know how to do is insult people!"

Umm...

So, out of curiousness...

If you don't "preach tolerance," then you can say anything you want, no matter how vile, and that's just fine?

There's no one on the right that says anything bad about anyone, ever?

There is a lot of intolerance on all sides. The thing is you can hate someone's ideas but not hate them personally. I read a lot of liberal blogs and things and I also see what people post here and there is very little respect or even decency by those on the left towards the right. It is true that there is also little tolerance for the left viewpoint by many on the right but many on the right do not claim to stand for tolerance.

I happen to have many friends and family members with whom I disagree on many many issues. In no way and at no time does it interfere with my respect for them as people. This is what is missing. Because modern politcs is about making a political opponent into "the other". It's an Obama speciality though all are guilty of it. But he is the president and he ran claiming to be above that. He most certainly is not. If we are going to move forward on any level in this country we are going to have to start recognizing that ideas can be wrong without being evil.

When it comes to the issues that define today's "liberalism", attacking profit and resource and income re-distribution, the country is certainly not moving

I'm fine with the corporations making money. I own a lot of stock and want those shares to increase in value.

I don't think paying workers more is redistribution of wealth. Painting a living wage as "redistribution of wealth" is disingenuous. I don't think a CEO should make 331 times the average worker. That is not wealth redistribution. It is more akin to a landowner and sharecroppers or Robber Barons and factory workers.

I enjoy a very good living because of a corporation. That doesn't mean I don't think the compensation is skewed. That is not advocating redistribution of wealth. Nor is it anti-profit.