35 people bested this!2 people are curious. |
Do you think this is the best? 
|
“At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child—miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”—P.J. O’Rourke
Get Great Stuff at 
(and other places we like)
Members that think The Republican Party is the best!
Comments
Screw Republicans
the above comment demonstrates PJ o’rourke’s statement.
Im neither Democrate or Republican Me and some frineds started our own political Party Just look up Republicrate
okay. whatever. :)
Yeah. :)
I say stop sending troops to the war all we need is a Spartan like John 117 also known as Master Chief.
I must say, I expected this thing to generate more controversy.
And I disagree strongly with P.J. O’Rourke. Just about every liberal movement is the direct result of a problem in society. The Civil Rights movement was liberal and undeniably good for our country, as was the women’s suffrage movement. And if you’ll look back a few centuries, our nation was radically liberal in its formation. O’Rourke’s statement could in some ways be used to describe conservatives: people who have the upper hand and know that if the masses start listening to liberals, they’ll lose it.
you may disagree with O’Rourke, but you don’t address his charge, let alone refute it.
the statements on this page by XxC0bHCxX support O’Rourke’s premise.
also, XxC0bHCxX and Silthilar (like Vano) are teenagers, while O’Rourke and I are middle-aged men.
people become more conservative as they age because people become wiser as they age.
1. the republican party is primarily mind and the democrat party is primarily emotion
2. republicans value “do your duty” over “follow your heart” (and democrats value “follow your heart” over “do your duty”)
3. republicans are primarily christian and democrats are primarily anti-christian
all three of the above positions demonstrate maturity over immaturity: adults value the mind more than children (children are more emotional); grown-ups value “do your duty” over “follow your heart” (children are the opposite); and the virtues of christianity are recognized by adults more than children.
Silthilar: “Just about every liberal movement is the direct result of a problem”
PJ O ’Rourke and I believe that by letting emotion overwhelm reason, liberals have come up with the wrong solution for every problem.
Silthilar: “The Civil Rights movement” america, always at the forefront of morality, was already moving in the correct direction (away from racism) when well-meaning legistation started to be enacted. in other words, civil rights is good; civil rights LAWS are not only unnecessary, but bad.
Silthilar: “our nation was radically liberal in its formation” okay, I’ll bite. how were our founding fathers more like clinton, obama, and edwards than giuliani, mccain, and romney?
Silthilar: “conservatives: people who have the upper hand” I think you’re correct that conservatives in some ways have the upper hand; but if so, it’s not by too much.
“if the masses start listening to liberals” you don’t think the masses have started listening to liberals yet?
radio: where conservatives have the upper hand: talk radio where liberals have the upper hand: the rest of radio (which includes NPR ) who wins? it’s close, perhaps a toss-up
television: where conservatives have the upper hand: fox news where liberals have the upper hand: the rest of television (which includes the 3 networks, CNN , and PBS ) who wins? liberals win going away
movies: who wins? liberals own the film industry
newspapers: where conservatives have the upper hand: the wall street journal editorial page where liberals have the upper hand: everything else who wins? liberals win going away
magazines: where conservatives have the upper hand: virtually nowhere where liberals have the upper hand: most magazines, including Time, Newsweek, and Sports Illustrated who wins? liberals win hands down
government: where conservatives have the upper hand: the presidency where liberals have the upper hand: congress who wins? it’s close
academia: liberals win going away
I think that your argument is too party-oriented. I know that this is the Republican Party, but I was attacking O’Rourke’s statement and conservatism in general. Throughout the course of the past century or so, the liberal movement has been picked up by both the Republican and Democratic Parties in turn.
“do your duty” over “follow your heart” etc.
Is it better to do your duty if your duty is immoral or misguided? There are cases where it is: the Southern white male considered it his “duty” to keep apartheid in place. The Japanese soldier in WWII considered it his “duty” to treat Chinese women and children worse than animals.
republicans are primarily christian and democrats are primarily anti-christian
Is this a virtue? I won’t get into the whole religious debate, but I think you’ll find that there have been relatively few occasions where religion and government have been mixed without bad consequences. People got hanged, burned at the stake, and otherwise mercilessly persecuted simply because they disagreed with the theocracy in power.
liberals have come up with the wrong solution for every problem.
Support, please.
america, always at the forefront of morality, was already moving in the correct direction (away from racism) when well-meaning legistation started to be enacted. in other words, civil rights is good; civil rights LAWS are not only unnecessary, but bad.
The essence of liberalism is moving – in any direction away from the current institution. The essence of liberalism is finding a problem and fixing it. (This is the dissatisfaction described by O’Rourke) And why is civil rights legislation bad?
how were our founding fathers more like clinton, obama, and edwards than giuliani, mccain, and romney?
Like I said at the top, I am not supporting the Democratic Party, except as the current liberal party. Frankly, I’d prefer it if our government could run without politicians. This being implausible, I prefer to vote left-wing over right-wing.
Note: Giuliani’s been divorced twice, McCain once. The only affair carried out by our founding fathers (T. Jefferson / Sally Hemings) was after Jefferson’s wife died. With the (single) exception of Monica Lewinsky, the Democratic slate you gave is clean. Funny, the Republicans are the ones claiming to stand for family values.
academia: liberals win going away
So liberals are smarter? I’m not seeing where this helps your argument. After all, you said that conservatives valued the mind more than liberals.
Silthilar: “Is it better to do your duty if your duty is immoral or misguided?”
Let’s first establish that conservatives value “do your duty” over “follow your heart” and liberals are the opposite.
Then we can argue the merits of each position.
Salle: “republicans are primarily christian and democrats are primarily anti-christian”
Silthilar: “Is this a virtue?”
I am attempting to clarify each position.
Then we can argue which position is more virtuous—christian or anti-christian.
Silthilar: “People got hanged, burned at the stake, and otherwise mercilessly persecuted simply because they disagreed with the theocracy in power.”
I agree that it’s a good thing we don’t have a theocracy.
But you’re jumping to conclusions and conflating two issues into one.
American christians are strong proponents of secular government.
Salle: “liberals have come up with the wrong solution for every problem.”
Silthilar: “Support, please.”
Read my numerous posts on various political, moral, and ideological topics on this fine website.
In addition to this, feel free to name a problem and I’ll name the solution.
Silthilar: “The essence of liberalism is moving – in any direction away from the current institution”
Well, not in ANY direction. Liberalism moves in a liberal direction. If that means supporting an institution, it does so. for example, liberalism supports the liberal institution of academia.
Silthilar: “The essence of liberalism is finding a problem and fixing it”
That’s actually closer to the essence of conservatism.
Silthilar: “why is civil rights legislation bad?”
Any unnecessary laws are bad.
Salle: “how were our founding fathers more like clinton, obama, and edwards than giuliani, mccain, and romney?”
Silthilar: “Like I said at the top, I am not supporting the Democratic Party, except as the current liberal party”
Does that mean you admit that our founding fathers were more like Republicans than Democrats?
Silthilar: “Frankly, I’d prefer it if our government could run without politicians. This being implausible…”
Implausible?
That’s like saying you prefer our skeletons be made without bones.
Implausible? How about: impossible by definition?
Silthilar: “I prefer to vote left-wing over right-wing”
When you’re old enough to vote, right?
Silthilar: “With the (single) exception of Monica Lewinsky, the Democratic slate you gave is clean”
The clinton I named is hillary. Didn’t you notice that I named the top three presidential nominees from each party for the current election?
Salle: “academia: liberals win going away”
Silthilar: “So liberals are smarter?”
If you really think that’s what I was saying, then I’m not sure what else to say.
Let’s first establish that conservatives value “do your duty” over “follow your heart” and liberals are the opposite.
You did that in your first post.
But you’re jumping to conclusions and conflating two issues into one. (Conservative vs liberal Christianity)
I was not the one who introduced the Christian facet of this debate.
By the way, I would like to see some support for your comment: _republicans are primarily christian and democrats are primarily anti-christian_
That’s actually closer to the essence of conservatism. (Finding a problem and fixing it)
Conservatism focuses on conserving the current way of things. Throughout history, conservatives have been the ones who opposed to change, whether the issue was civil rights, slavery, or alternative energy, among others.
Any unnecessary laws are bad. (Civil rights)
Do you really think that the white south would have willingly relinquished apartheid? Laws forcing people to let U.S. citizens vote are not unnecessary, nor are they harmful. Laws making discrimination illegal are not unnecessary, nor are they harmful.
Does that mean you admit that our founding fathers were more like Republicans than Democrats?
I never said anything like that.
The point I made in my first post (our nation was radically liberal in its formation) had nothing to do with our founding fathers, Republicans, or Democrats. It had to do with the fact that our nation was in no way conservative in its manner of birth. For a colony to rebel against its mother nation was about as liberal as you could get in the 1700s.
Implausible? How about: impossible by definition? (Government without politicians)
Let me rephrase that: I don’t like any politicians, regardless of party, but I prefer liberal to conservative.
When you’re old enough to vote, right?
Of course.
The clinton I named is hillary. Didn’t you notice that I named the top three presidential nominees from each party for the current election?
In which case there isn’t even the Lewinsky affair on the Democratic slate. Guiliani and McCain’s black marks are still there.
If you really think that’s what I was saying, then I’m not sure what else to say.
Were you saying anything besides that liberals have the upper hand in academia?
Salle: “Let’s first establish that conservatives value “do your duty” over “follow your heart” and liberals are the opposite.”
Silthilar: “You did that in your first post.”
So you agree with that premise?
For the most part. I try to avoid generalizations, but I think that’s a fairly valid one.
Silthilar: “I try to avoid generalizations”
you’ll be happier and more successful in life if you learn the following about generalizations:
-most statements are generalizations. -it’s not helpful to attempt to avoid generalizations -the question to ask yourself is not “is that a generalization?” but rather, “is that generalization accurate?” -for a generalization to be useful, it need only be 51% accurate -and last but not least: All wisdom is generalization
I wasn’t saying that generalizations are bad, although they are logical fallacies and as such make less-than-optimal foundations for arguments. Generalizations are certainly useful for brevity’s sake, though.
We Rule! Conservative+Republican+Woman+Smart+Nice=(Hopefully) Our next president for 2012! :D liberals are all left-winged morons. i got this thing about liberals off of urbandictionary.com and its so true:
liberals2. Those who have abandoned logic and reason, and rely on 'warm fuzzys' as a sound basis for the making of decisions.
3. Avocates of policy that empowers a strong federal government to enslave its people with the high tax burden incident to the support of extravagant and unnecessary (not to mention unconstitutional) social programs destructive to both the work ethic among the lower class, and the incentive to innovate and succeed among the upper class. In effect: To overthrow the constitution by destroying the basic guarantees of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that its framers ingrained into it. ('...it's like when three wolves and a lamb vote on what to have for dinner...' Liberals are the wolves who punish those in our society who work hard and are successful.)
4. Hypocrites who deride members of the religious right for 'imposing its religion' upon them. Ironically, also guilty of trying to impose its religion upon the religious right... just bitter because the religious right, nation wide, still holds the majority. (Hey, morons: Every law is an imposition of someone's morals on someone else. You're just mad that its not your morals that are being imposed!)
5. Moral elitists who look down with disdain upon the traditional values and faith in the Creator that made this nation the greatest in history. They view those who hold to The Faith as unenlightened and unsophisticated, those who 'just don't get it'.
6. Hypocrites who preach tolerance of all, then openly mock and ridicule Republicans/Christians, deniers of global warming, and others who disagree with them.
They preach environmentalism as they criss-cross the nation in private jets, limos, and SUV's, and pay thousand-dollar electric bills for their multi-million dollar mansions, all while preaching the new national religion (a concept they also claim to oppose) of environmentalism with its apocalyptic 'the-sky-is-falling' global warming BS.
They advocate equality and freedom of choice for all, yet they advocate the progressive tax structure that punishes and takes freedom from those who've succeeded. Yet they favor discrimination against white males whom they blame for all of societies' ills (like driving minorities and the lower class to lives of poverty and incarceration), and avocate affirmative action which furthers the racial discrimination that they claim to have fought to end.
They claim to advocate the elimination of poverty, yet vehemently oppose teaching people how not to become poor: WORK HARD, GET AN EDUCATION, AND KEEP YOUR LEGS CLOSED TILL MARRIAGE. (Look it up. It really is the way to eliminate poverty...)
They hold steadfastly to the constitution, holding sacred the Bill of Rights, while decrying the two rights that guarantee all of the others: The rights to freedom of the press (McCain-Feingold act, and the fairness doctrine) and the bearing of arms (all gun control).
Opponents of the death penalty for those most deserving of death, advocates of abortion of those most deserving life.
Liberals often refer to themselves as 'progressives'. This is, however, an inaccurate term, as liberalism does not lead to progress. It only tears down time-honored traditions and proven institutions like the family, democracy, faith in God, self-reliance, personal responsibility, hard work, and other things that make our nation great. Liberalism advocates a return to the primal, the carnal, the primitive, the calling of evil good and good evil, and therefore is not progressive. A more accurate term might be 'regressive'.
Liberals come in several variations:
Hollywood liberal: A celebrity who lives a trite, meaningless life in a drug-induced haze of casual sex, infidelity, and amorality, changing spouses like designer shoes, who then lectures the rest of us on what's right and wrong.
Also a member of the Hollywood elite that produces films, music, and tv that portrays the US to the world as a violent, greedy nation of oversexed hedonists with plastic boobs (see Baywatch, Beverly Hills 90210, Desperate Housewives, and other popular American fare airing throughout the world in film and syndication) and then blames George Bush and the Republicans for making the world hate us.
Wine and cheese liberal: (Often synonymous with "Hollywood liberal") Liberals who fly their private jet to town and show up at an event in a limo, while wearing designer clothes and expensive jewelry as they associate with other liberals, bemoaning the miserable quality of life around the world, AIDS, poverty and global warming, the fact that the French hate us, and blaming Americans (or specifically the Republicans) for causing it.
See Bono, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, George Clooney, Sean Penn, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jane Fonda, Tim Robbins, Madonna, etc...
Poor Liberal: A liberal who sits on his couch all month waiting for the welfare check to come. Claims to be unable to find a job or uses "I'm holding out for a management position" as justification for being unemployed for five years while his wife is out bringing home the bacon.
Poor liberals always vote for candidates who'll show the most 'compassion' to the poor, as they know that 'compassion' is lib-speak for 'welfare'.
Other poor liberals rely on 'compassion' to feed the six kids they had before the age of 21 with six different fathers. They can't rely on the fathers because they're all in prison. They aren't held responsible, because, wine-and-cheese liberals say, it's not their fault. It's the white man's fault for being rich, thereby making them poor.
Still other poor liberals eagerly await the day when they will receive repairations for the injustice of slavery that their ancestors endured, claiming outwardly that that fact alone entitles them (having never been enslaved) to a free ride, while inwardly looking for a way to subsidize a life of laziness and thereby avoid having to work for what they get like the rest of us.
Smart liberal: There is actually no such thing as a smart liberal. The term is an oxymoron. Smart liberals only think they're smart because they work in a university (they work at universites because they're not smart enough to get jobs in the private sector). This is generally speaking of course, as there may actually be one or two somewhere.
Bill Clinton: Not necessarily liberal or conservative, he just parties with liberal chicks 'cause he knows they'll put out. (Such behavior explains, therefore, his advocacy of abortion rights.)
Other types exist, however they really aren't worth mentioning.
"ummm... like.... I'm totally for pro-choice..." - Jewel