Posted on 07/26/2011 7:25:51 AM PDT by Kaslin
It's no secret that liberals and conservatives don't get along. But, if there's any one thing that we've learned from the liberal love of sensitivity classes and situation comedies, it's that once people get to know each other and learn about each other's beliefs and concerns, all legitimate differences melt away. So, with that in mind, I'd like to relieve the concerns of our liberal pals by telling them what we conservatives are really like. Think of it as sensitivity class – for liberals. Granted there may be a few conservatives here and there who disagree with me on these things, but as someone who has known conservatives all my life, I can assure you that they're the exceptions, not the rule.
1) I don't hate black Americans, Hispanic Americans, gay Americans, Jewish Americans, Muslims, or any of the other groups that liberals obsessively claim that conservatives hate. In all fairness, you could probably make a great case that I strongly dislike Nazis, Satanists, Fred Phelps’ clan full of weirdos, and Noam Chomsky, but who doesn't? Not only is it extraordinarily offensive to be falsely accused of hating whole classes of people, it's really bad for America to try to falsely convince tens of millions of Americans that they're despised and hated by half the country.
2) I'm not rich, I don't have any particular love of rich people, and I'm not being paid off by the Koch brothers (although they're welcome to start at any time.) Of course, I also don’t envy the rich, think it's "unfair" that they have more than I do, or want to punish them because Paris Hilton and the Kennedy family don't deserve their money. So, am I "in the pocket" of the rich? No, it can just seem that way if you're comparing conservatives like me to people who seethe with resentment for people who’ve done well in life.
3) I'm not "anti-science." I like science. I read books about science. In fact, I'm extremely dubious about embryonic stem cells and manmade global warming because I've been convinced by science-based arguments. Moreover, it seems rather odd that the "pro-science" side of these debates seems to rely on pleas from Michael J. Fox, sad stories about polar bears, and iffy claims about "consensus" when the "anti-science" side seems to trot out statistics and science-based arguments. Let's face it: You don't have to accuse people of wanting birds to die to get them to buy into the theory of gravity. If you can’t convince people to buy into a scientific argument with science, then maybe your evidence is a whole lot shakier than you seem to think.
4) I'm an anti-authoritarian, non-conformist. That's one of the reasons I don't like the government inserting its tentacles into our lives, it's why I work for myself, and it's a big part of why I'm on the Right. People think we take "marching orders" from Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, or the Koch brothers? Hell, conservatives are the only real rebels left in American society. We're the ones who have the courage to say that we're not victims, that we don't care if Hollywood and the media disagree with us, and we're willing to advocate policies we think are good for the country even if we're called "mean" for it. You can be the biggest jerk in the world and you'll still be patted on the back for being "compassionate" by everyone from Lady Gaga to the teachers at your kid's school, to the New York Times if you're a liberal. Want to be slandered, demonized, and constantly accused of being things you're not because you believe in doing the right thing? Be a conservative.
5) I love women and I don't think they should be barefoot, pregnant, and chained in the house on a clothesline that runs between the bedroom and the kitchen. As a matter of fact, I'd say I'm more supportive of women than a lot of liberal feminists today because while I don't think women HAVE to be stay-at-home moms, I consider that to be every bit as much of a valid and important career choice as being a corporate VP. Also, isn't it a bit ironic that conservatives are accused of "hating women" in a country where Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are wildly popular on the Right, while liberal men launch non-stop misogynistic attacks at them and their families?
6) I'm a compassionate person. I give money to charity, I've bought groceries for people, and I've held fundraisers on my blog to raise money for people in need. In fact, one of the biggest reasons I'm a conservative is that I believe our philosophy is the best way to do good in people's lives and preserve the best things about this country for future generations. This baffles some liberals, who can't seem to understand how that can be the case when conservatives oppose so many government programs that "help" people. What they may be missing is that if the government is not an unalloyed good, but a "necessary evil," then its "help" is often as counter-productive as tossing shotguns into the middle of a drunken barfight so people can "protect" themselves. Compassion is about what you do personally, not what government programs you advocate funding with other people's money.
7) Although I'd like to see liberalism become as discredited as Nazism, I don't want to see any liberals shot, murdered, killed, blown up, sliced, diced, carved, cut, or eviscerated because they disagree with me politically -- and that includes abortion doctors. If we have a constitutional republic and you believe in the Constitution along with law and order, then you should believe in solving even extreme political disputes via political means, not via violence. Incidentally, I will also not shout down a liberal on stage at his own speech to try to prevent him from speaking, throw pies at him, toss glitter at him, engage in a citizen's arrest/kidnapping, or protest at a liberal's home, which we all know is nothing more than a veiled threat. Those are fascist tactics, which have no place in a democratic society and all decent people should speak out against that kind of behavior.
Of course they couldn't call themselves compassionate socialist, compassionate communist, or benevolent totalitarian, because no one in America would have supported their programs back then.
well said
See my post #5!
I knew it!
The author is a homo!
Sorry but I don't agree. Modern liberalism, like communism, Nazism, facism, and maoism (all derivatives of socialism) is about demagoguery in order to gain power. It's easy to get drawn into ideological debates, but it's not about what any of the fill-in-the-blank-isms say but what they do. While they preach egalitarianism, it's only intended for the masses (even if misery is it's fruit) not for themselves. We could be suffering from another great depression, and the earners could have been fleeced of all of their wealth, and still the people in positions of power will eat Kobe beef washed down with Cristal while we all starve. They don't want "gender equality", gay marriage, "reproductive freedom", to "fix healthcare" and to "save the environment". Every issue that liberals care about weakens our nation so that they can gain more power. Do you think they care if they ruin the country in the process? Heck No! They openly advocate ruining it so they can pick up the pieces. They aren't planning on some socialist utopia either...even though that is what they say. It will be like every other totalitarian police state hell hole. They want nothing but to rule us absolutely and they will say and do anything to gain that power. Debating them is utterly futile because they have no principles, no standards, and no true ideology. They will say anything, promise anything, and do anything as long as it furthers their ultimate goal...to become queen bees in a big hive of drones.
Promises?
Why should any Conservative "promise" anything to Liberals.
Liberals love to hear this simpering, "I'm really just a sensitive guy, why won't you love me?" baloney.
As soon as they hear it, they know the person is on the defensive, and they can then press on with their agenda.
If you want to promise a Liberal something, promise him/her that you are going to fight them tooth and nail, to the death if necessary. The days of partisanship, multicultural sensitivity, blah, blah, blah, are over.
Liberals, like Muslim Terrorists, only respect POWER. If you cede it to them without a fight with such promises, they will follow their natural path: 1). Control your speech, because it removes a problem for them 2). Control your actions, because it removes a problem for them, and finally, 3). Jail You and/or Eliminate you completely, because it removes a problem for them.
Wake up, this is war. The enemy isn't just outside the gate, trying to tear it down, they are also inside the Fort, trying to open the gate to their comrades.
Did you read the article, or just the title?
Since Ann Coulter also appears in the video, are you saying she is a lesbian?
They're setting up rules of engagement that will definitely not be to their advantage and wil lproceed with an inexorable logic. We'll have no choice but to folloow through. Their choice, not ours. Or, to quote Ayn Rand, "Brother, you asked for it."
Another example of Proverbs 26:4-5.
Don’t argue with these fools on the surface issues,
but point out that you know what the true goals are and make them answer to that.
That pretty much summed up most of my perspective! I’ve always had trouble articulating it.
That might be because I was speaking with a liberal relative who ceaselessly interjected “Uh, Uh...Chimpy-McBush-Hitler! Haliburton! Cheney’s War Crimes! Racism!” Etc...
Try this: "Castro killed his thousands. Pol Pot killed his 1,000,000. Stalin and Mao killed their millions. How many will your regime murder?"
Thank you, John Hawkins, for writing this and to you, Kaslin, thank you for posting it!
You’re welcome
Well, let's see, I read every word of the article that you posted on FR. And since you did not indicate that it was excerpted, Yes, I believe that I read the article.
But finding out if I read the article wasn't the purpose of your snarky post, was it?
It really didn't matter to you whether I read the article or not, you just didn't like my response, so you thought you would give me the old "jeez, did you read the article?" snark.
Let me clarify something for you noob. It doesn't matter whether I read it all, or just the title. You're not the arbitrator of what I think, or post on FR. So you know where you can put your snarky comment.
I’m mystified about what might have been wrong with your post.
Hahaha! He lost me on the first one...I’m a hater....
Perhaps we both will find out if the individual who didn't like it can move beyond snark.
At the moment, I believe that it follows a pattern I've seen many times over the years here at FR.
Somebody joins who wants to participate in the best Conservative forum there is. They start a blog, or write some articles in conservative circles, articulating their ideas and positions (so far so good).
But then, over time, they begin to believe that since a number of people agree with them, that anyone who doesn't must have something wrong with them.
They basically get "too big for their britches", and feel that they must move beyond posting counter-arguments to other FR posters, and move into posting snark and ridicule. After all, if someone doesn't agree with them, that person must be a knuckle-dragging imbecile who "posts without reading the article!"
Over the years, I've watched many of them arrive, deem themselves to be more important than FR and any other poster. Then one day -- zap, they're history.
Let's hope this FReeper is smart enough to avoid that future, as I have actually agreed with some of his posts. Only time will tell.
Bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.