What A Liberal (Really) Thinks

[sbp]

http://www.insightmag.com/news/739270.html

The idea that liberals are concerned, compassionate, altruists, and that conservatives are evil and greedy is being promoted by Democrats and their mainstream-media acolytes. The purpose of this is to convince the electorate to vote for Democrats, who are the representative political party of liberals, because it is they who are concerned about all of us - not just certain special-interest groups.

This caused me to rethink liberal ideals and determine just how altruistic they are. After all, if it can be shown that these claims of altruism are false then people should be aware of the hypocrisy of the liberals.

During this process it occurred to me that I am a modern liberal (instead of a classical liberal). I never realized it before. However, when reviewing the issues that are dear to the compassionate, concerned soi-disant guardians of our morals, our civil rights, and our laws that is the only conclusion possible.

Unlike most liberals, I will not couch my beliefs by calling myself a moderate. I will not say, as Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and John Kerry do, that I am mainstream. After all, the purpose of being a liberal is to tell the mainstream what they should think. Liberals know the masses are too stupid to act in their own best interests. As one of the left's icons, Felix Dzerzhinsky, founder of Russia's notorious Cheka, once wrote about the Russian peasants, "They are so ignorant that they have no idea what is in their interests."

After reading these issues that define the modern American liberal you too will conclude that you concur with liberals.

Pro-choice? You bet! I think people should have the choice to send their kids to parochial or private schools just like many public school teachers, Democratic Party politicians, feminists, and New York Times' journalists do.

Anti-death penalty? Absolutely! I don't think a baby in its ninth month should be executed.

Civil unions? Sure thing! I think all unions should be civil. There probably would be fewer divorces if they were. Fewer divorces means fewer welfare programs.

Gun control? Indubitably! You definitely need to control the gun when shooting a murderer.

Redefine families? You got it, dude. The only time Northeastern liberal newspapers use the word family is to describe the mob.


Prayer in schools? Forgettabout it. If kids studied like they should, they wouldn't have to pray before exams.

Separation of church and state? Absolutely!!! As it is right now, religious institutions - especially parochial and other religious schools - are subsidizing public school districts across the country. If all those students in religious schools were sent to public school, every school district in the United States would have to triple its taxes to pay for the influx. Parents of students who go to private religious and parochial schools are subsidizing school districts and therefore are paying an indirect tax. This is unconstitutional!

Freedom of dissent? Right on! Conservative students and faculty should be allowed to express their beliefs.

Affirmative action? No doubt about it. The ACLU, NOW, and the Sierra Club should hire black executive directors immediately. The network news anchors of Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather should be replaced by blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and or women.

No limits for lawsuits? You know it. I think lawyers should be sued every time they file one of those frivolous lawsuits.

Rehabilitation for criminals? Unquestionably! I think judges who place dangerous criminals on probation should be sent to a prison facility to be rehabilitated.

Equal Rights for Women? Undeniably, women should have to prove that they should be awarded custody of kids in divorce cases just like men do.

More social programs? Certainly! The greatest social program a nation can provide for its citizens is to keep them safe and free.

It is amazing that all this time I was a liberal and did not know it. Realizing what we have in common, I want to invite my fellow liberals to join me, and work together to make this country truly a place where everyone can thrive and be free.

In other words vote for George W. Bush.

[Lmandrake]

So know we know yet another columnist makes their living pandering to the fears and resentments of those assaulted by Lamocrats and liberals.

What do you think exemplifies how liberals are hypocrites?

[TruckStuff]

Originally posted by Lmandrake
So know we know yet another columnist makes their living pandering to the fears and resentments of those assaulted by Lamocrats and liberals.

Why is it that when the left criticizes the right its OK, but when the right criticizes the left, its "pandering to the fears and resentments of those assualted by liberals"?

Originally posted by Lmandrake
What do you think exemplifies how liberals are hypocrites?

Shall we start with welfare? Its enough of a hand-out to keep people living in sub-standard conditions. The left doesn't want to give them too much money because then they might climb out of their current condition and not vote Democratic anymore. Democrats NEED those people to stay right where they are for the rest of their lives, and that is exactly what welfare accomplishes. Hypcracy: saying you care about the poor and needy in this country then not truly helping them out of their current circumstances. (This is made even worse by the fact that the left gives crumbs to these folks to keep them loyal.)

Or how about education (and perhaps the left as a whole)? Groups like the NEA claim to be "open" and "tolerant" of all view points. At this year's NEA convention, a resolution was put forward to withdrawl the NEA's pro-choice position from its platform (why an educators union needs a position on abortion in the first place is beyond me). The sponsors of the bill were booed off of the stage and verbally assualted by their fellow delegates because they were "hateful." Hypocracy: claiming to be open and tolerant of all views, unless they come from the right.

[FlyingPenguin]

The left doesn't want to give them too much money because then they might climb out of their current condition and not vote Democratic anymore. Democrats NEED those people to stay right where they are for the rest of their lives, and that is exactly what welfare accomplishes.

Jeez. A bit paranoid are we? All I'll say is I haven't heard of any great solution to welfare come from the right (or the left for that matter).

The problem isn't the left or the right. The problem is that anyone who makes it to a high office in this country generally makes so much money by then that they are completely out of touch with the middle class, much less the impoverished.

Just out of curiosity, would you abolish Welfare entirely? What would you replace it with? Not making any accusations, just want to hear how you would "fix" the problem.

[Lmandrake]

OK, let me get this straight. The hypocrisy in welfare is not giving welfare recipients more money?

You know, there is a certain appeal to this "economic slavery" argument. But if you think about it, would conservatives agree to give welfare recipients MORE money? I doubt it.

Maybe conservatives would get behind not giving the destitute ANY money. But they know the Liberals would never do that, nor would most Americans feel very good about people starving or going homeless.

So this economic slavery thing is just a win - win argument for the right.

I don't know much about welfare reform. Clinton was talking about some welfare reforms at some point, something about "workfare" or something similar, but I don't know if anything came of it.

I don't quite get your point about criticizing the right v. criticizing the left. There's plenty of criticism of the left on this board. I don't like it, but its a free country. Personally, I feel a lot of people on the right are motivated by fear and resentment, but that's just my feeling about it.

I work with a guy who is pretty conservative. He gets crazy about gun control. But he doesn't own a gun, has never shot one etc. I used to belong to the NRA, have done plenty of shooting and don't believe in gun control because it doesn't work. On the other hand, I don't believe for a second that the government wants to take guns away from joe six-pack. Automatic weapons perhaps, but otherwise, no. So why is there such fear that the government wants to do this?

[FlyingPenguin]

This is spooky. Lmandrake and I have been getting the last word in on some of these posts lately...

[TheSovereign]

no one cares anymore bush has won for sure

[dadx2mj]

Originally posted by FlyingPenguin
This is spooky. Lmandrake and I have been getting the last word in on some of these posts lately...

Just seems foolish you guys are set in your beliefs just as I and many others are set in ours. Seems kinda pointless to keep bashing each other over the same disagreements over and over.

[sbp]

Originally posted by FlyingPenguin
This is spooky. Lmandrake and I have been getting the last word in on some of these posts lately...

I've been busy buying stock in tissue companies. On November 2nd there is going to be a lot of crying.

<img src="http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/pics/liberal.jpg">

[FlyingPenguin]

I'd buy stock in oil companies if Bush wins... only sector that will do well....