by smiling_is_creepy September 25, 2005
Get the Liberalsmug. Officially the most annoying people in the world.
They seek the downfall of the worlds morals , but they will it because they themselves think they are being moral. They want to replace true morals with twisted morals.
Most of them are actually athiests/non religious but are trying to be moral and "good" people for no actual reason , and doing it the completely wrong way.
They try to speak for equality and acceptance , but they refuse to accept people who aren't warped like them. So in this sense they are also hypocrites.
They seek the downfall of the worlds morals , but they will it because they themselves think they are being moral. They want to replace true morals with twisted morals.
Most of them are actually athiests/non religious but are trying to be moral and "good" people for no actual reason , and doing it the completely wrong way.
They try to speak for equality and acceptance , but they refuse to accept people who aren't warped like them. So in this sense they are also hypocrites.
Liberals are those people who , despite not being gay themselves and have no gay friends either will defend gay peoples right to shove each others dicks up each others shit holes to the death , for no known reason.
They care more about gay peoples rights than actual gay people even care about gay rights.
They also quite like to defend peoples rights to kill babies.
They are NOT good people like they like to think they are.
They care more about gay peoples rights than actual gay people even care about gay rights.
They also quite like to defend peoples rights to kill babies.
They are NOT good people like they like to think they are.
by FuckLiberals82347 August 6, 2011
Get the Liberalsmug. Liberals
Hateful term applied to anyone smarter than George Dubya. If it weren't for liberals slavery would still be completely acceptable. Liberals are often called Un-American for having common sense. Apparently Common sense is now only a European trait. Often picked on and despised for questioning questionable leadership as if we should follow our leader (reguardless of who) off a bridge without question. Liberals are despised for thinking for themselves as Republicans always blame the non-existant "liberal media" for the problems and turn to Fox news for their daily intake of rightwing bullshit which they like to call "fair and balanced"
Liberal: I voted for John Kerry because I think he's more qualified to lead our country.
Moron: You're Un-American
Source: Aaron, Mar 29, 2005
Wait,"SMARTER THAN BUSH"? LMFAO!!!!!
If liberals are so much smarter than Bush then how come Bush is the one who won the election? How come Republicans won so big?
Hateful term applied to anyone smarter than George Dubya. If it weren't for liberals slavery would still be completely acceptable. Liberals are often called Un-American for having common sense. Apparently Common sense is now only a European trait. Often picked on and despised for questioning questionable leadership as if we should follow our leader (reguardless of who) off a bridge without question. Liberals are despised for thinking for themselves as Republicans always blame the non-existant "liberal media" for the problems and turn to Fox news for their daily intake of rightwing bullshit which they like to call "fair and balanced"
Liberal: I voted for John Kerry because I think he's more qualified to lead our country.
Moron: You're Un-American
Source: Aaron, Mar 29, 2005
Wait,"SMARTER THAN BUSH"? LMFAO!!!!!
If liberals are so much smarter than Bush then how come Bush is the one who won the election? How come Republicans won so big?
I guess you liberals aren't as smart as you think you are because Bush appears to be smarter than all of you! ROFLMAO!!
by ^_____^ - laughing at liberals April 21, 2005
Get the Liberalsmug. An ideological group driven by emotion rather than reason. Truly believe they're intellectually superior to everyone else, much to the amusement of everyone else.
Conservatives/Independents/Libertarians: We really can't afford to buy everyone in the United States a house, car, and private jet.
Liberals: Think of the children!1!!!1!
Liberals: Think of the children!1!!!1!
by RO191 June 14, 2010
Get the Liberalsmug. by damyankee April 17, 2005
Get the Liberalsmug. The word 'liberal' is derived from the Latin word 'libertas,' meaning 'liberty.' Liberalism started in 17th Century Europe as a logical and historical development from Protestantism with its focus on an individual having a direct personal relationship with God. Liberalism is also rooted in the English tradition of individual rights and privileges. John Locke's *Second Treatise on Civil Government* articulated the basic principles of liberalism--limited government, private property, equality before the law, the rule of law (meaning an impartial application and enforcement of the broad-based laws that allow for a wide scope of private discretion), and some democratic influence to restrict those in power. Locke, himself a Protestant Christian, believed people to be naturally sinful and selfish, but rational and social enough so that they could peacefully interact with one another. Laws are needed to maintain order, but largely the State should be restricted only to protecting private property (broadly defined as a person's private sphere), and to enforce contracts. The Founders of the United States were all followers of Locke. Jefferson's *Declaration of Independence* is an American adaptation of Locke's basic political philosophy. Puritan John Milton's defense of free speech in his *Areopagitica* provided the intellectual justification of the First Amendment from a Christian metaphysic.
With John Stuart Mill we find a bridge to another conception of liberty and equality that moves more toward socialism. Mill was highly influenced by his wife, Harriet Taylor, who was more of an egalitarian than a liberal. Here we find Mill arguing against classical notions of liberalism. Mill argued, contrary to Locke, that a just law is an encroachment on a person's liberty. He also contended that informal, non-coercive public opinion was a violation the rights of the individual as are traditional prohibitions, say on sexual morality or gender roles. In these moves to conceive of liberty in a broader way that simply overt coercion, Mill started to blur the line between private and public. Mill was also concerned about the distribution of wealth and income in ways that the Founders of the U.S. were not. Mill,at times, argued for a greater role for the State to actually achieve equality of result and actual liberty from others as opposed to a purely formal equality and liberty that the classical liberals sought.
These differences point to a fundamental divergence between classical and modern left liberals. Another such difference is the basic character of human nature. Locke and the U.S. Founders believed that humans were naturally selfish and dangerous in their exercise of power. For this reason, the U.S. Founders placed explicit restrictions on the State including a Bill of Rights, federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Jefferson's admonition that the power that the State has to do something for you also has the power to do something to you follows from the doctrine of human depravity found in Christianity.
Left liberals tend to view humans as naturally good or malleable. No one is born evil. So, with the proper education and proper social and economic environment, people can naturally cooperate and care for each other. Brutal punishment is inhumane and simply aggravates past injustices making those convicted of a crime even more alienated and victimized by the unequal social order. What is needed to avert criminal behavior is greater inclusion and benevolence. The mechanism that facilitates these moral advances can be the State. Concerns over abuse of power, at least in social welfare legislation and macroeconomic policy, are not only misplaced but can be unnecessary obstacles for social progress.
Classical liberals view of legitimate State action is quite different. Physical punishment is seen as necessary to control those who freely choose to violate the rights of others. The State is needed to contain human evil and establish justice by retribution fairly imposed. Preparation and engaging in war can be necessary to protect a country from the attacks of an international aggressor. In both domestic and international crime, the person(s) who initiate violence forfeit their rights and violence can be justly used against them.
Some classical liberals such as Jefferson, Tocqueville, and Benjamin Constant believed that liberty was supported in the indigenous cultures of free countries. All of the Founders of the U.S. believed that a necessary condition for liberty was moral self-control. Religion provided the average person with the moral training and habit to prepare them to live responsibly with their fellows. Leftist liberals in contrast tend to be indifferent or hostile to traditional cultures and traditional religion and morality. Following Mill, they tend to see tradition and religion as restrictions on liberty and hindrances to greater social and political equality.
These leftist liberal theorists would not only include Mill, but T.H. Green, John Dewey, and John Rawls. These writers combine some elements of classical liberalism with socialism.
Contemporary classical liberals would include F.A. Hayek, Robert Nozick, and Milton Friedman. They are considered conservative because they are trying to conserve or preserve the original liberal tradition that can be traced back to Locke and the U.S. Founders. They clearly reject an active role for the State in achieving actual equality because such extensive and intrusive actions by the State violate individual liberty and place social planners over average people in power relationships.
With John Stuart Mill we find a bridge to another conception of liberty and equality that moves more toward socialism. Mill was highly influenced by his wife, Harriet Taylor, who was more of an egalitarian than a liberal. Here we find Mill arguing against classical notions of liberalism. Mill argued, contrary to Locke, that a just law is an encroachment on a person's liberty. He also contended that informal, non-coercive public opinion was a violation the rights of the individual as are traditional prohibitions, say on sexual morality or gender roles. In these moves to conceive of liberty in a broader way that simply overt coercion, Mill started to blur the line between private and public. Mill was also concerned about the distribution of wealth and income in ways that the Founders of the U.S. were not. Mill,at times, argued for a greater role for the State to actually achieve equality of result and actual liberty from others as opposed to a purely formal equality and liberty that the classical liberals sought.
These differences point to a fundamental divergence between classical and modern left liberals. Another such difference is the basic character of human nature. Locke and the U.S. Founders believed that humans were naturally selfish and dangerous in their exercise of power. For this reason, the U.S. Founders placed explicit restrictions on the State including a Bill of Rights, federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Jefferson's admonition that the power that the State has to do something for you also has the power to do something to you follows from the doctrine of human depravity found in Christianity.
Left liberals tend to view humans as naturally good or malleable. No one is born evil. So, with the proper education and proper social and economic environment, people can naturally cooperate and care for each other. Brutal punishment is inhumane and simply aggravates past injustices making those convicted of a crime even more alienated and victimized by the unequal social order. What is needed to avert criminal behavior is greater inclusion and benevolence. The mechanism that facilitates these moral advances can be the State. Concerns over abuse of power, at least in social welfare legislation and macroeconomic policy, are not only misplaced but can be unnecessary obstacles for social progress.
Classical liberals view of legitimate State action is quite different. Physical punishment is seen as necessary to control those who freely choose to violate the rights of others. The State is needed to contain human evil and establish justice by retribution fairly imposed. Preparation and engaging in war can be necessary to protect a country from the attacks of an international aggressor. In both domestic and international crime, the person(s) who initiate violence forfeit their rights and violence can be justly used against them.
Some classical liberals such as Jefferson, Tocqueville, and Benjamin Constant believed that liberty was supported in the indigenous cultures of free countries. All of the Founders of the U.S. believed that a necessary condition for liberty was moral self-control. Religion provided the average person with the moral training and habit to prepare them to live responsibly with their fellows. Leftist liberals in contrast tend to be indifferent or hostile to traditional cultures and traditional religion and morality. Following Mill, they tend to see tradition and religion as restrictions on liberty and hindrances to greater social and political equality.
These leftist liberal theorists would not only include Mill, but T.H. Green, John Dewey, and John Rawls. These writers combine some elements of classical liberalism with socialism.
Contemporary classical liberals would include F.A. Hayek, Robert Nozick, and Milton Friedman. They are considered conservative because they are trying to conserve or preserve the original liberal tradition that can be traced back to Locke and the U.S. Founders. They clearly reject an active role for the State in achieving actual equality because such extensive and intrusive actions by the State violate individual liberty and place social planners over average people in power relationships.
"I am a liberal, they are socialists." Milton Friedman distinguishing himself from leftist liberals.
by Tex in Tex January 18, 2008
Get the liberalmug. Somebody stupid enough to think that Federal Government should have a lot more power than local governments.
They actually think that some stuffed-suit in Washington D.C. knows what's best for the citizens of every single different state, city, and town in the United States from a Federal viewpoint.
They actually think that some stuffed-suit in Washington D.C. knows what's best for the citizens of every single different state, city, and town in the United States from a Federal viewpoint.
That dumb liberal wants to raise my taxes here in Florida, to help pay for after school art classes for kids in Montana.
by Jimmy Fartpants February 19, 2007
Get the liberalmug.