rasetsu wrote:
Which boils down into wanting no change unless it's already proven itself good change, which it can't do if you don't enact the change first. So it's a recipe for no change. Conservatives tend to focus on "It's change, therefore it's bad."
And Liberals tend to focus on "It's change, therefore it's good." Of the two, the more dangerous and harmful is the liberal position because it advocates for change without considering the unintended consequences, and usually merely as a political pandering to the lumpen liberal proletarians who want someone to "do something" to satisfy their selfish desires for outcomes that favor their, and only their self-interests.
Seth wrote:Liberals are stupid motherfuckers who want change qua change and who don't care if the change is bad for society or if it harms others so long as their atavistic and antisocial liberal desires are fulfilled.
How quaint. If you really believe this then you are nuttier than I thought. Most liberals would consider this a misrepresentation of their motives and goals.
Most liberals consider any resistance to their selfish and antisocial individual desires to be a "misrepresentation of their motives and goals," but it ain't, it's simply an observable truth, and they are nuttier than vat full of chunky peanut butter.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
