[Cartertonian]

The quotes should have been around the word 'hate'.

I confess I always interpreted the intent of the OP as to infer that to hate is pretty illiberal, and so therefore had put 'liberal' in quotes in order to question just how liberal such people are.

[Wolfman]

It is illiberal, but the accusation is a fallacy, so the quotes should be around 'hate'

[normalamerican]

It seems like the left hates everything because most of their dogma is predicated on either the accusation of hate - "you hate blacks, you hate mexicans, you want old people to starve, you want children to starve. you want to bring the sweatshops back, you want to destroy the earth, you want to return us to Jim Crow and Slavery.....", or just the nasty dismissiveness of everything - "you're not paying enough in taxes, charity doesn't give enough so we need more taxes, business doesn't share the profits enough so they need to be taxed more, teachers aren't paid enough, illegals aren't paid enough, minimum wage isn't paid enough, that's no good, I don't like this, these don't make me happy, those aren't nice enough........"

An entire philosophy built on being angry and seemingly full of hate for everything under the sun.

Meanwhile, they'll tell you that a conservative who says "we don't have the money to pay for that, or half of those folks aren't qualified".....are FULL OF HATE !!

[Wolfman]

Unless you're a 13 year old, you have no excuse for using fallacies in a debate. And if you are a 13 year old, you shouldn't be on this forum.

[normalamerican]

I guess you've never watched Olbermann, Maher, Whoopi, Behar, Rosie, Matthews, Maddow, Franken, Jeremiah Wright, Pelosi, Sheehan, Penn, Moore, Robbins, Garafolo, Jackson-Lee, Farakkhan, and others.

Why is that everything you guys wish wasn't true about your favorite little enterprise....is a "fallacy" ? Words actually have meanings that are supposed to be consistent for all of us.

[Wolfman]

I guess you've never watched Olbermann, Maher, Whoopi, Behar, Rosie, Matthews, Maddow, Franken, Jeremiah Wright, Pelosi, Sheehan, Penn, Moore, Robbins, Garafolo, Jackson-Lee, Farakkhan, and others.

No. Nor do I care about the opinions of pundits.

Why is that everything you guys wish wasn't true about your favorite little enterprise....is a "fallacy" ? Words actually have meanings that are supposed to be consistent for all of us.

Because insulting your opposition is a fallacy by definition. Also, notice my signature image. You can probably guess that I don't like Libertarians (actually, I hate Libertarians with a burning passion, and this is fairly well known). Now, do me a favor, and go check out this thread. Notice I'm telling someone who is all but insulting Libertarianism he is being fallacious.

[normalamerican]

You can dismiss the opinions of pundits, and still admit that they exist, and adopt a certain set of annoying positions. You called it a fallacy that annybody says certain things, and I gave you the names (a small sampling) of those who do. That is all.

It's not a tree-in-the-woods thing.....If you didn't hear it, it doesn't mean that nobody ever said it.

You should be in love with American style conservatives. They are the perfect middle ground between crazy-assed libertarians who want no controls on anything, and crazy-assed liberals who want stifling controls over everybody and everything.

[Wolfman]

You can dismiss the opinions of pundits, and still admit that they exist, and adopt a certain set of annoying positions.

The crazy stupid pundits exist on both sides. And both sides pundits are equally worthless in my mind.

You should be in love with American style conservatives. They are the perfect middle ground between crazy-assed libertarians who want no controls on anything, and crazy-assed liberals who want stifling controls over everybody and everything.

FYI, while I've been called basically everything from a Communist, to a Fascist, to an Anarcho-Capitalist, I'm closest to being a Titoist. Which is a branch of Socialism. I'm not a Titoist per se, but it is what I'm probably closest to being at the moment.

[normalamerican]

But don't you ever get tired, striating them into thousands of tiny different labels, down to the gnat's ass ? Is a Titoist really gonna get something done in today's world, radically different than the Trotzkyite down the street ?

Maybe if it's Tito Jackson or Tito Ortiz or Tito Puente or Tito Fuentes that you're referring to.

[CounterChaos]

An entire philosophy built on being angry and seemingly full of hate for everything under the sun.

Frustration...That is all it really is. You just need to take that into consideration whenever you are debating someone with an opposing position. I'm going to borrow a line from Cartertonian that Figlio di Moros is using as his signature, as I think it is very appropriate here:

"The closer one gets to 'ideological purity', the more one will dismiss out-of-hand any notion which is not congruent with one's particular ideology."- Cartertonian

Once you understand this, then it becomes your responsibility to guide the debate in a better direction. If you lose your cool, then you just fuel the fire.

One thing I do is, I tell myself that there really is no such thing as hate-just misunderstanding and frustration.
I am the boring type-long drawn out explanations full of evolution and genetics loaded with old mans conjecture...I envision the younger generation here yawning and hurriedly going to the next poster. What gives me comfort though, is knowing when they get to be my age, they will be doing the same thing..