Things that bother me about liberals

Not in theory but actual experiences

from JoeUser Forums

Whether it be talking with friends, relatives, or just casual acquaintences, if the subject of politics comes up, I have noticed very specific behavior patterns between those who tend to be left of center politically versus those who are right of center. 

There are plenty of things that annoy me about political conservatives too but not as consistently as "regular" people who are politically left. The list below is not a list of annoyances of politicans or public figures but rather traits of left of center people I have met in real life that seems to come up over and over.

So here's my list of things that bother me about dealing with political leftists:

  1. Choose their positions based on emotion and passion rather than through research or investigation
  2. Rarely look up for themselves the underlying facts on a given issue but rather rely on "trusted" advisors or editorials
  3. Are very intolerant of views that do not match theirs. I don't think I've ever seen a conservative say "I don't want to hear anymore, let's talk about something else".  by contrast, over and over, liberals will (at best) ask you to change the subject because they don't want to hear other points of view or (at worst) try to bully you from giving an opposing point of view.
  4. Act as if their positions have some sort of moral high ground simply because their positions are based on "good intentions".
  5. Similar to #4 -- take the view that their position is the "civilized" or "moderate" point of view. And that other points of view are simply barbaric "Of course guns should be outlawed" or "You didn't vote for Kerry? You seem like such a smart guy."
  6. Have no knowledge of the tax system even as they loudly advocate higher taxes on "the rich". There's nothing quite like seeing a 3rd grade teacher espousing how the rich pay hardly anything in taxes even as they are talking to someone they know pays immense amounts of taxes (because I usually make sure to correct this falacy).  And I usually get "Then you need to get a better accountant" as if they have any concept of the tax structure.  Oh yes, I'll just use the magic loopholes that liberals are so certain exist and avoid taxes...
  7. Think that feeling strongly about something counts more than actually doing something.  My $1k contribution to the Cancer Society isn't as significant as someone who did a "Cancer walk" and got $315 in donations apparently.  And btw, it's nice to do a cancer walk, it's even nicer to donate money yourself. Walking, chanting, whatever may make you feel but but it does nothing. It's the people donating to the cause materially that are actually making a material difference.
  8. Think that witty sarcasm is a substitute for a coherent argument for their position.  How many times have you made a point only to have a left winger try to dismiss it with a one-line sarcasm "Of course we armed Osama, I guess we got what we paid for.."  That's a non sequitor and stupid to foot.  But knowing little irrelevant pseudo-factoids is not a substitute for knowledge on the actual issue.  It really comes to a head if Iraq comes up. Most anti-Iraq "war" advocates can't put together a coherent argument against it.
  9. Massively inconsistent, simple minded positions. There's nothing quite like having a friend in Southern California say "Wars never solved anything".  Really?  You plan to argue that southern California should go back to Mexico?  Because there was one war (US/Mexican) that most definitively and materially solved a particular question. Not to mention the Civil War and slavery, World War I, World War II, Korea, and Gulf War I.  Or some middle class person living in a house in Florida that they inherited from their father arguing for higher estate taxes (why wait? why not hand your house to the government right now?). Or my favorite "There's no excuse for anyone to go hungry in this country." as an argument for more welfare.  I agree there's no excuse, only a total dumbass could go hungry in this country. Welfare ain't gonna fix that. 
  10. Problems are always to be solved by someone else.  To left wingers, being compassionate seems to mean being intellectually concerned about people but not wanting to actually do anything.  My uncle, a conservative, drove down to Louisiana as part of his church group to repair people's houses.  Meanwhile, not a single liberal I know has volunteered for anything but they sure have argued for more government spending on Katrina relief -- which is easy for them, I end up paying for it.
  11. Believe in equality unless equality is inconvenient.  I try not to flaunt my material success but at the same time,  I am proud of what my family has achieved.  My wife and I started with nothing (and btw, yes you can live on minium wage -- I did).  But if I object to paying more in taxes, I am called greedy by some of my liberal friends.  If I ask if they want to compare how much they donated to charity last year (not taxes, charity) they always come back with the "well you have more to give" argument.  So what?  And I've even tried to do the "Okay, then as a percentage of our income comparison" I still get the "we don't have as much excess money to give as you do" argument.  And on taxes, even though I use the same roads, schools, police, etc. and pay literally over 50X more in taxes than most people and support progressive taxation, I still get implied arguments that I don't want to pay my fair share if I object to paying even more in taxes.
  12. Obsess on diversity of skin color instead of diversity of ideas.  What is it with the left and their obession with skin color? Yet, as I mentioned earlier, liberals are incredibly intolerant of other ideas. They want to live in an echo chamber. Most conservatives I know enjoy a good intelligent discussion.  Most liberals get angry and frustrated with people who dare to have different (or incorrect) opinions.  I have one friend named Chris who is liberal who is the exception to this (so if he's reading, kudos to him) who will intelligently and thoughtfully discuss issues without getting angry.  I can't think of any liberal friend or relative who doesn't get angry and frustrated if confronted with opinons that don't match theirs.

Like I said, these are observations on public speakers. These are observations on friends, family, acquaintences that I meet and talk to.  I am often almost made to feel like I should be ashamed for having conservative..uncivilized view points. If only I were as enlightened like them and used my heart more I would be ready to be welcomed into their civilized society.

politics
21,195 views 52 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
liberals are all talk. they have the ideas and want someone else to pay for it.

like gene he wants the infrastructure to be fixed as do we all. but he isn't willing to give up a dime to do so. he wants someone else to fix it.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Okay, I have to admit that I am gulity of some but not all of these things. I know that I am particularly guilty on count number one. I find number three, being intolerant of other views, more of a conservative characteristic through my personal experiences.

~now can we please just not talk about this anymore? - ~lol~
Offworld Trading Company
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have had similar experiences with both sides. I am no fan of stupid, the common denominator, I suspect. When I asked a friend why was he voting for George Bush, he had no susbstantive answer, but that "I think he's a good leader." If he's such a good leader what are we doing in this extremely expensive war? I asked another friend why he hated (his word) Hillary Clinton so much. His answer, "I don't know, I just hate her." OK.

LW, your response about illegals would make more sense to me if, indeed, you did speak out about non-Hispanic immigrants here illegally. I rarely see anything said about Canadians or that open Canadian corridor to our north, for example. As far as Obama goes, I question his credentials myself, but on grounds of his actual qualifications, not hysterics regarding whether or not he went to a Muslim school as a grade schooler.

The problem with conservatives is that they have a long history of prejudice and seem deeply suspicious, sometimes xenophobic. Anyone who has lived in the deep south can attest to this. I do not see them working very hard to overcome this, and when they do, as with GW and his stance on Mexicans, conservatives say he is alienating his base.

My sense is that when liberals and conservatives get together, liberal frustration with conservative views is based more on the type of thinking conservatives display, i.e., dichotomous. They tend to be, by definition, reductionistic and deotological. Such thinking really disallows exploration of a topic for the sake of anything but to maintain the status quo, hence frustration.

I will admit there are princes and princesses on both sides who behave so smugly you want to smack 'em (we'll leave that to the whip).

Be well.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
How many times have i been frustrated by your lack of research (#2) in favor of simply repeating things you've read or heard elsewhere?


Just because you think it doesn't make it true. Occassionally, I get irate enough to just dash off a post but generally I do read up on a subject before I post. As far as the generalizations some of them just happen to be true and I agree wtih them 100%. Is calling a someone an ass trumpet somehow more clever?
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hey, sodaiho, I'm interested in your opinion on THIS:
http://gideon-macleish.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=159551


Interesting Gid, I had just posted a note on your blog. Good article. Frankly, I don't see how you and Hillary are that far apart (ducking for cover). She is a child advocate and most sincere children's advocates understand that removel of a child is often the very last option that should be exercised. Yet with staffing cuts, funding cuts, and all sorts of program cuts, how else can a CPS agency insure a child at risk will not be abused or killed?

As I repeatedly say, I am no fan of stupid, and there are a ton of self-righteous, stupid social workers out there who really ought to either get out of the business, get some really good supervision, or go on to graduate school where they might learn to think out of the box a bit. On the other hand, there are a ton of perps out there, parents included, who duck behind family values as way of throwing smoke to avoid facing their own malevolent behavior toward their children.

I have had one too many community and church pillars in my caseload who enjoyed having sex with their children to think that CPS is a manifestation of the Evil Empire.

Be well.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Frankly, I don't see how you and Hillary are that far apart (ducking for cover).


First of all, Hillary is a politician. She does what is politically expedient. I have anecddotal (I will probably research later) information that she has not ruled out the use of nuclear weapons in dealing with the war on terror, and any friend of the bomb is no friend of mine. What I know that is NOT anecdotal, however, is that she has repeatedly supported the war in Iraq and will most likely continue to do so. While I believe we need to clean up the mess as best we can, I do not approve of what we have done in this war, and do not approve of a presidential candidate who does.

Hillary refuses to be pinned down on issues and is every bit as duplicitous as her husband, who said in his campaign that he would approve NAFTA only if US labor and environmental standards were enforced, and then proceeded to rubber stamp the trade agreement once elected. She supports con artists like AL Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, who not only are not working to eliminate poverty in the inner cities but are lining their profits with the money they have extorted from businesses allegedly on behalf of those in the inner city.

Hillary believes "it takes a village". I believe it takes a responsible set of parents. Granted, there are times when those parents don't have all the tools they need, but it is in our best interest to TEACH them, not to steal their children away with unmarked vans and take them away from their parents. In my time working to this end, I have found instances where children were removed because their parents couldn't pay the electric bills, one case where the child was removed because his mother lived in a tipi, and another, even more shocking case where the child was removed because, among other things, there was scant furniture in the home. The furniture was not there because the parents had to move 1/2 mile to their residence using only a radio flyer wagon to move things. The state is not trying to work with parents, as gutting the foster care industry is working against their own self interest.

I was raised partly in "foster farms", Sodaiho, the end product of an overzealous government that decides that they, not their citizenry, know what is best for the American people. At least one of the "foster farms" is still in operation, despite the fact that I reported it some 20 years ago. Hillary has not worked to prevent these injustices from occurring, nor has she ever expressed anything remotely resembling empathy for the parents of these children who, imperfect and flawed as they are, often do the best with the tools they are given.

Hillary and I are not much alike, Sodaiho. To Hillary, public accolades are everything. To me, if I end up in a forgotten grave, but make a substantial difference, the monument I have left will be far bigger than any they could place on the mall in Washington.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
LW writes: Liberals always want it both ways. Race is only to be taken into account to beat someone over the head with. You can't be against illegal immigrants without being against Mexicans, which automatically makes you a racist, understand?

I understand this is how you see it. Yet, I just don't see the furor over Anglo illegals. The furor is over those who come and "take jobs from Americans" and the context is almost exclusively Mexicans. Show me a single article against illegal immigration that does use Hispanics as exemplars of the "problem."

As a matter of principle I am not "for" "Illegal" immigration. At the same time, I do not quite get the furor, it borders on xenophobia. I am not for lawbreaking, yet I do think we should be smart enough to figure out a solution to the problem. I know in my part of the country businesses rely on immigrants (mostly illegal, I am sure) to do the farm and field work, lots of construction, and other sorts of things. Shipping them back to Mexico would not be particularly helpful, in my opinion, but then, I am a liberal and I guess I must be soft on crime.

LW opines: By the same token, you can't be against increasing entitlements without being for starving children. You can't be pro-life without wanting to punish women, outlaw birth control, and teach abstinence-only in the schools, get it? If you're against socialized health care, you're a mean ol' ogre who wants to see people die in the streets of commonly cured diseases, if you oppose federally funded stem-cell research you're trying to BAN science, and if you favor tax cuts you're a heartless capitalist pig who only wants to see the rich get richer...off the backs of the poor. (who pay zero taxes.)


I think these are false dichotomies, but in the sense of them, there is a grain of truth. I would like to see people opposed to increased entitlements have some solution for the problems associated with poverty other than the Horatio Alger stories that abound among what were once called yuppies. Or how federally mandating that pregnancies go to term is somehow the governments business. Or why we should, in fact, teach abstinence only as the sole way of preventing pregnancy or STDs, especially in view of the fact that every study I am aware of shows these programs fail. How is it not opposing science to oppose stem cell research? LW, the poor pay taxes...most poor are working poor and they pay tax. Welfare recipients pay taxes on every item they purchase, admittedly from the tax dollars they receive, but none the less the tax reduces the benefit of their subsidy and the state or fed recovers some of their tax dollars in the process.

Be well.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
How is it not opposing science to oppose stem cell research?


Sodaiho,

You are repeating a common myth and I need to call you on it. Stem cell research is not banned, only federal monies to fund it. If it is so important and offers such incredible breakthroughs, why aren't more private investors/donors stepping up to the plate?

Things that make you go hmmmm.....
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hillary isn't sincere about anything except wanting to be president
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
as for who is racist it is the people who gain power keeping that alive. and most of them are democrats.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Federally mandating that pregnancies go to term"? What, so women who miscarry face jail time? Seems like you're presenting a false dichotomy of your own.

In the end, women who support abortion do so out of a simple desire to avoid responsibility. They are willing to kill their own children in order to avoid responsibility. Can you see why some people find the idea abhorrent?

I'm not against sex education - heck, my thirteen-year-old daughter knows the whole story at this point, and she learned it from me. I'm also not against birth control; seems like only fanatic Catholics could be.

But once that egg gets fertilized, a person has been created and you have no right to kill that person just because you don't want to be responsible for it.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
I suppose the worst failure of your responsibility for a person would be their death. Best to get it out of the way early, I guess.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hunny, welfare recipients get tax REFUNDS on taxes they never paid in the first place? Ever hear of the EIC? All you have to do to 'earn' it is have children.



LW,

Great dialogue. Thank you.
In the first place, there is already a temporary worker program in place for migrant workers who come to help with various harvests. Additionally, I have never been an advocate of shipping anyone anywhere, I favor enforcement by attrition. In other words, let's stem the flow by securing our borders, (north and south) and do little else.


Good. We are in agreement here. My only issue with the guest worker program is that legal border crossings are incredibly challenging, as well as the completerlty inefficient systems in place to handle it. Illegal immigration has been an easy reliel to the businesses that use such labor.

Yes, they (as in illegal immigrants) DO take jobs from Americans, as can be witnessed by the fact that whenever a raid is executed on a business resulting in the deportation of their workers, American citizens immediately line up for the jobs.


Maybe in your area, but not here. I know of very few non-Mexicans willing to pick cotten, harvest chili peppers, shake the pecan trees, and dig up the onions we grow here. Of course, I could be wrong.

And the last time I checked, Sodaiho, American citizens came in all sorts of colors and countries of origin. Wanna know who's hurt the most by illegals in the job market? Our own 'African American' citizens, followed by young people just entering the work force, and our own retirees looking for a little part-time work to supplement their Social Security checks.



This may very well be true. And it is very unfortunate. Again, our state has about 1% African American population. And the last time I looked, seniors were not about to go out and pick chilis.


Our welfare system has enslaved generation after generation of Americans who find themselves literally trapped in a cycle of dependency with zero incentive to break free of it. A fellow who used to blog here used a quote that became a favorite of mine, although I don't know if he coined it or not. It said..."Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life. Give a man a fish and you own the pathetic s.o.b."


We are on the same page here. I used to work in this system and had the same issues. So, revamping the system is clearly in order. It is offensive to me as a social worker when a grandmother brings hger granddaughter in to claim her "own" check. At the same time, cutting people off, like dumping people out of pych hospitals in the 70s and 80s, will not help unless there are sufficient systems and resources in place to address the problems of education, lack of skill (both life skills and work skills), drugs and other addictions, and of course, teen parents.

I worked as a school psycholgist for a few years and I can attest to the entrenchement of family based anti-school attitudes. Children just could not seem to wait to get old enough to quit school so they could get a job at Mickey D's. So sad. Parents would claim they could not control their children and wanted me to control them for them. On the other hand, when we did attempt to control them, we'd have the "I don't hold to government telling me what to do with MY kids" folks blowing smoke all over the place. It is, indeed, a mess.

I don't think the federal government has any say so in it either way, Sodaiho. I think it's a matter of State's rights, and if the decision were put back in the hands of 'we the people' on a state-by-state basis, I think that would be a good start towards resolving the issue, or at least some of the bitterness it inspires.


Good idea. I'm with yiou here.

It's nice to know you think you know all about Conservative thought, though. Myself, I think you've got it confused with Fundamentalism. Just as all liberals aren't godless heathens, all conservatives aren't fundamentalists.


I don't claim to know all about conservatives, but I was a businessman and the Executive Director of my loical Chamber of Commerce. You know I grew up in the south, a conservative mecca, and have Republicans on one side of my family. It is true what you say, not all liberals are godless, but I am not soooo sure about conservatives not being fundies of one stripe or another.

even though I personally think it's wrong to create these cells for that sole purpose.


And this is just it. Such cells exist already and are simply thrown away.

I'll happily change my position if and when any and all cures or treatments resulting from this testing are shared with the public that funded the research at cost. Until our government is willing to do that, let the filthy rich pharmaceudical companies that you liberals despise so much pay for the research, and reap whatever profits may come from it.


My daughter is a Post Doc researcher at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Before this, she worked as a doctoral student in a University Alzheimer's lab (a disorder I am stricken with). Her research at University was freely disseminated. And at St. Jude, all of their research is done through donations and all of their services are without charge. My understanding is that research across the board is seriously hampered by the few stem cell lines available.

I don't despise pharmaceutical companies, just some of their policies and methods. Profit is good, but the degree of profit is obscene when there are folks who have to choose between food or drugs.

Hunny, welfare recipients get tax REFUNDS on taxes they never paid in the first place? Ever hear of the EIC? All you have to do to 'earn' it is have children.


My understanding of the Earned Income Credit is that to be eligible a person must have been employed in the tax year in question.

I hope I've cleared up some misconceptions, Sodaiho. Not all conservatives are wealthy, white, fundamentalist, xenophobic, and compassionless males. I'm on the low end of the income scale, disabled, non-Christian, and possessed of far more compassion than many here will ever know. I'm also willing to bet that I've fraternized (as in socially) with more non-whites on a continuing basis than many of the 'liberals' posting here have even met in their entire lives, and yeah, that includes blacks, hispanics, and (gasp) even the odd Muslim here and there.


Glad to see we have so much in common, LW.

Be well (ducks sand covers).

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

I often see some of the same sorts of behaviors in many of my religiously conservative friends.  Or even those who have strong views on anyone foreign.  But it's true that you can talk to any random left-minded individual and probably hit at least half of the points below.

I think you can more accurately say this is a list of annoyances for anyone who "feels" their political views.  For every liberal I knew growing up there was one conservative who acted in much the same way.  I think in general these people don't arrive at their political views on their own, but take them from their family growing up, or whoever they spend the most time with.  Anyone who actually arrives at their political views on their own through experience and research should be able to civilly and reasonably argue their point of view without resorting to anything on that list.

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The EIC is only for those who EARNED income. If you have not worked, you do not get it, period. Welfare does NOT count. Straight from the IRS website.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Earned income does not include all of the following types of income:

Investment Income
Taxable refunds
Alimony received
Unemployment compensation
Pay received as an inmate in a penal institution
Retirement income
Child support
Money or property that was inherited, willed to you, or received as a gift
Life insurance proceeds received because of a person's death
Section 8 Housing Allowance
Food Stamps
TANF and other welfare benefits"
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
(Sorry this is so long, wanted to respond to each of Draginol’s points)

What an interesting article. It’s even more ironic that while I consider myself a conservative (even though many think I should be liberal due to my low income level) some of these things on this list can actually describe me somewhat.

Choose their positions based on emotion and passion rather than through research or investigation

I do use my emotions a lot in some of my positions but they are also based on what I know and understand. But many here did point out a truth about me on how I was making uneducated replies and that has made me change my way of expressing myself by making sure I know what I’m saying before I say it.
I have to agree, I too have met many Liberals (I live in West Palm Beach, FL) who are this way, too many if you ask me.

Rarely look up for themselves the underlying facts on a given issue but rather rely on "trusted" advisors or editorials


As I said above this pretty much described my way of blogging before. Not anymore.

Are very intolerant of views that do not match theirs. I don't think I've ever seen a conservative say "I don't want to hear anymore, let's talk about something else". by contrast, over and over, liberals will (at best) ask you to change the subject because they don't want to hear other points of view or (at worst) try to bully you from giving an opposing point of view.


Funny how that’s exactly what goes on on this site day in and day out. All I look for is a decent debate that will yield an idea of what people think about this country and how we can all find some middle ground that can benefit everyone. Instead all I see is “my way or the highway” attitudes (from both sides most of the time) and “you’re just an idiot” arguments that even I can’t avoid. While I try to not get personal and insulting with most here there are 1 maybe more who I just can’t help but using the word idiot on my first reply, I need not to mention names to point them out.

I read, I listen and I give them the benefit of the doubt. When I reply I usually do it by referring to how I see it different, not necessarily saying they are wrong, but God forbid that’s how I come off. It’s usually an insult or a backlash that follows instead of a decent rebuttle.
Act as if their positions have some sort of moral high ground simply because their positions are based on "good intentions".

And here I thought everyone’s ideas on how to make this country better were based on good intentions. I guess this means that no one else’s positions but theirs count because there is just no other way to have good intentions other than thinking as a Liberal. I must really hate my country if I’m a Conservative because all I want is to do it harm with all my bad intentions. But then again they say some of the worst things in life were done with good intentions. Maybe we have the right idea then.
Similar to #4 -- take the view that their position is the "civilized" or "moderate" point of view. And that other points of view are simply barbaric "Of course guns should be outlawed" or "You didn't vote for Kerry? You seem like such a smart guy."

As I pointed out in my first paragraph and the one before this, I must be an idiot for being Conservative since I would have voted for Bush if I was interested in it and my ideals are without “good intentions” or “barbaric”.
Have no knowledge of the tax system even as they loudly advocate higher taxes on "the rich". There's nothing quite like seeing a 3rd grade teacher espousing how the rich pay hardly anything in taxes even as they are talking to someone they know pays immense amounts of taxes (because I usually make sure to correct this falacy). And I usually get "Then you need to get a better accountant" as if they have any concept of the tax structure. Oh yes, I'll just use the magic loopholes that liberals are so certain exist and avoid taxes...

I wouldn’t say everyone here is ignorant to this; I for one am but I understand it a bit when someone writes an article on their position on taxes. But I believe they do tend to scream things as if they know exactly what they are talking about but when you point out a flaw in their argument they quickly get defensive and start pointing out all the bad stuff our Party has done as if it negates the downside of their argument. In other words trying to say “you shouldn’t talk” as if we didn’t have the right to point out an error just because we may have done one before.
Think that feeling strongly about something counts more than actually doing something. My $1k contribution to the Cancer Society isn't as significant as someone who did a "Cancer walk" and got $315 in donations apparently. And btw, it's nice to do a cancer walk, it's even nicer to donate money yourself. Walking, chanting, whatever may make you feel but but it does nothing. It's the people donating to the cause materially that are actually making a material difference

I’ll admit I am not in a position where I can give without hurting myself financially in the process but I do give when I can. I feel it helps more and feels better if it came from my pocket than from someone else’s while I don’t do anything except ask them for it. I wish I could do more, I do what I can but at least I do something about it. I am not afraid to point out problems and do something about it as oppose to others who try to ignore it or downplay it so as not to be seen as racist, hypocrite or cheap. But I can’t deny wanting to ignore them considering how ungrateful some people are and how painful it can be to be a nice person. Nothing like offering to help someone do their job like cleaning an oil spill only to be insulted for not trying to do something about it myself before.
Think that witty sarcasm is a substitute for a coherent argument for their position. How many times have you made a point only to have a left winger try to dismiss it with a one-line sarcasm "Of course we armed Osama, I guess we got what we paid for.." That's a non sequitor and stupid to foot. But knowing little irrelevant pseudo-factoids is not a substitute for knowledge on the actual issue. It really comes to a head if Iraq comes up. Most anti-Iraq "war" advocates can't put together a coherent argument against it

Witty is another term for smarts around this site. If you can outwit someone here you can be seen as a genius. At least that’s what I get from some of those who use wits as most of the meat in their “debate”. I like the ones who use your words and make them look like you don’t know how to use them like when I said we should make movies about all past Presidents to show how screwed up our Gov’t is regardless which Party is in charge and someone who will remain nameless for now made it seem as if I was trying to say “use my time machine to video tape past Presidents and make a movie out of it”.
Massively inconsistent, simple minded positions. There's nothing quite like having a friend in Southern California say "Wars never solved anything". Really? You plan to argue that southern California should go back to Mexico? Because there was one war (US/Mexican) that most definitively and materially solved a particular question. Not to mention the Civil War and slavery, World War I, World War II, Korea, and Gulf War I. Or some middle class person living in a house in Florida that they inherited from their father arguing for higher estate taxes (why wait? why not hand your house to the government right now?). Or my favorite "There's no excuse for anyone to go hungry in this country." as an argument for more welfare. I agree there's no excuse, only a total dumbass could go hungry in this country. Welfare ain't gonna fix that.

I think when they say “doesn’t solve anything” I believe “anything” refers to we still go to war instead of talking (diplomacy). Diplomacy to me is a joke, kids don’t kick and scream because they are looking for compromise, they get what they want, even if it’s not what they were crying for in the first place. In the end some parents give in. The same goes for those who we usually end up at war with, they are not willing to fight and die for compromise, they want what they want and are willing to die for it. In the end the one with the least will power will have to give up something. Compromise? I don’t think so, they didn’t want to give it in the first place. Compromise only works if both sides are willing to give something will getting something in return, good for both, not just one.
Problems are always to be solved by someone else. To left wingers, being compassionate seems to mean being intellectually concerned about people but not wanting to actually do anything. My uncle, a conservative, drove down to Louisiana as part of his church group to repair people's houses. Meanwhile, not a single liberal I know has volunteered for anything but they sure have argued for more government spending on Katrina relief -- which is easy for them, I end up paying for it

Day in and day out I constantly argue how some (if not most) people just refuse to do anything themselves (unless it’s easy and makes a lot of money in one shot). Especially when the concept of someone else doing it for you exist such as Gov’t programs that pay your bills, put food on the table and even give you an education, all without you having to life a finger except to sign your name a few times and to pull out your ID to cash the check, unless you have direct deposit. I find it amazing how people seem to have the energy to shop at the supermarket or any other store, carry the food or other items such as electronics home, cook it or install it yet they refuse to work for it. Or even funnier are those who do work under the table jobs while collecting money from the Gov’t so they can get those other extras such as Big screen TVs, a Lexus, Playstation 3’s, etc. And God forbid some of them will actually give from their own pockets to help those people they scream need more money.
I’m not a big fan of giving to help these people who won’t (see how I said won’t not can’t) help themselves. My taxes should not go to those who milk the system. Throwing more money at it only increases the abuse of it.
Believe in equality unless equality is inconvenient. I try not to flaunt my material success but at the same time, I am proud of what my family has achieved. My wife and I started with nothing (and btw, yes you can live on minium wage -- I did). But if I object to paying more in taxes, I am called greedy by some of my liberal friends. If I ask if they want to compare how much they donated to charity last year (not taxes, charity) they always come back with the "well you have more to give" argument. So what? And I've even tried to do the "Okay, then as a percentage of our income comparison" I still get the "we don't have as much excess money to give as you do" argument. And on taxes, even though I use the same roads, schools, police, etc. and pay literally over 50X more in taxes than most people and support progressive taxation, I still get implied arguments that I don't want to pay my fair share if I object to paying even more in taxes

Equality? That’s rich (no pun intended). How can there be equality when we have people who wanna work to make a living and then there are those who want a living from those who work. So if Joe works 40 hours a week to make $1000 after taxes we should give Jim who doesn’t have a job because he can’t find one a tax-free $1000 check so we can all be equal? Please, if anything I don’t want anything the Gov’t has to offer because it becomes a hassle just to get it. Nothing like having to stand in 6 hour lines just to apply for food stamps so that the Gov’t employee can treat you like you life is in their hands and you are some kind of a criminals or lazy bastard if you need help from the Gov’t when you can probably get a job. I should know, I have tried it all. Not to mention the hassle once you have it to use it. People always verifying you are who you are, that the paperwork is legit, that it’s still active. It plain sucks, I would rather work and pay out of my pocket than have to go thru the grueling process of the paperwork.
Obsess on diversity of skin color instead of diversity of ideas. What is it with the left and their obession with skin color? Yet, as I mentioned earlier, liberals are incredibly intolerant of other ideas. They want to live in an echo chamber. Most conservatives I know enjoy a good intelligent discussion. Most liberals get angry and frustrated with people who dare to have different (or incorrect) opinions. I have one friend named Chris who is liberal who is the exception to this (so if he's reading, kudos to him) who will intelligently and thoughtfully discuss issues without getting angry. I can't think of any liberal friend or relative who doesn't get angry and frustrated if confronted with opinons that don't match theirs

I find it interesting to see so many black people (that I know) who are Liberals simply because Conservatives use to be or were considered racist and bigots back then. Because they believe that Liberals and/or Democrats are for the poor people. That with them they will probably never have to work again. At least that’s what I get when I talk to some of them and happen to get their political opinions on stuff. I’m Conservative and I’m not a racist. I believe I have part African in my blood since at one time there were black slaves in Puerto Rico and my Grandfather had many features seen in black people. I wouldn’t have minds dating girls of any race; I love variety (not intended as it sounds). I have friends of many races and so do my kids. My wife’s 2 best friends are black and my wife is Hispanic. My father in law is about as black as one can get being Puerto Rican. I see people. Not color. I think anyone is capable of reaching incredible strides if given the chances. I don’t think anyone deserves to get a bump simply because they are Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. They deserve it by earning it. If we need laws that will give a Hispanic of low grades a boost into a great college while leaving out the kid with all A’s because he’s white only means that this country is worse than we wanna see it that we need a law to contradict racism.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top

We finally fixed the quoting as you may notice.

Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Nope, not at all, if you have children and fall below a certain income level, you can claim EIC whether you actually worked outside the home or not.

A childless person has to work to claim it, though.


Actually, you do have to have earned income to claim it, LW. I'm not sure whether entitlements count, but if you have zero earned income, you get squat. We found this out the hard way the year before last when the stupid H&R Block accountant deducted all of my mileage and vehicle expenses, leaving us with a rather paltry sum after all of the deductions were realized. This knocked out "refund" down significantly. I would have had it re-done, but we were already getting back more than we paid for the year, so I wasn't going to be an ass about it.

But we didn't have H&R Block do our returns this year.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

Funny how that’s exactly what goes on on this site day in and day out. All I look for is a decent debate that will yield an idea of what people think about this country and how we can all find some middle ground that can benefit everyone. Instead all I see is “my way or the highway” attitudes (from both sides most of the time) and “you’re just an idiot” arguments that even I can’t avoid. While I try to not get personal and insulting with most here there are 1 maybe more who I just can’t help but using the word idiot on my first reply, I need not to mention names to point them out.

We're not talking about people on the Internet. We're talking about people we meet in real life.  In real life, overwhelmingly in my experience, it's people who hold liberal values who simply do not want to hear opposing points of view. They will simply say "I don't want to hear anymore." 

I am not talking about people being intractible in their points of view. I am talking about people becoming physically angry because someone else doesn't share their philosophy.

And here I thought everyone’s ideas on how to make this country better were based on good intentions. I guess this means that no one else’s positions but theirs count because there is just no other way to have good intentions other than thinking as a Liberal.

Good intentions are the first step to a solution. They are not the ends unto themselves.  One cannot say "Let's build a bridge out of cotton so that it's softer" and argue they have the moral high ground simply because they have good intentions.

I want to eliminate all long-term welfare because I think it has the best chance at decreasing overall poverty.  Someone else who says that everyone should automatically get $50,000 from the government does not have the moral high ground simply because they think their intentions are good.

Good intentions do not give one a moral high ground.  Good results do.

Another item I would add is that liberals worry far too much about "fairness".  You can almost immediately spot a liberal if their comments or posts or speech are peppered with "fairness".  Liberals seem to be much more comfortable with indefinable concepts like "fairness" (who defines what's fair -- them -- very convenient!). 

Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
We're not talking about people on the Internet. We're talking about people we meet in real life. In real life, overwhelmingly in my experience, it's people who hold liberal values who simply do not want to hear opposing points of view. They will simply say "I don't want to hear anymore." I am not talking about people being intractible in their points of view. I am talking about people becoming physically angry because someone else doesn't share their philosophy.


You're right. I do however work with a Liberal guy (it's just us 2 down in the basement, yet there's actually a basement here in Florida) who does get angry often when I express my point of view. Because of company policy I try to avoid politics as often as I can, but with the radio on AM stations most of the time (FM stations are not so great around here, too many commercials) we listen to a lot of talk radio and mostly politics, so it can be hard at times to avoid it. He is passionate about disliking Bush, but is willing to admit not everything is his fault. But he's still a bit loony.

Good intentions are the first step to a solution. They are not the ends unto themselves. One cannot say "Let's build a bridge out of cotton so that it's softer" and argue they have the moral high ground simply because they have good intentions.


That is so true ( and no I am not kissing butt here people).

I want to eliminate all long-term welfare because I think it has the best chance at decreasing overall poverty. Someone else who says that everyone should automatically get $50,000 from the government does not have the moral high ground simply because they think their intentions are good.


If anyone knows about welfare its me, I spent many of my young years being the translator to many of my family members who did not speak English while applying for welfare. I was only about 7 years old and had no clue what was all this about. To be honest I want there to be some kind of welfare that will get people out of poverty and into the working world and help them learn to sustain themselves and get off the welfare almost as fast as they got on it. I have found myself in really hard times and have had many family members constantly tell me to get Gov't help. The few times I tried it was a horrible process, seems almost as bad as getting into this country legally even though it's obviously not. I chose to find a job and earn my living than have to deal with the Gov't.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Excellent article Draginol.  I think you summarized the issues with liberals pretty well.  Sadly many of them will never learn from your list, though I wish that all would at least read it and recognize how much of themselves show up there.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Excellent article Draginol. I think you summarized the issues with liberals pretty well. Sadly many of them will never learn from your list, though I wish that all would at least read it and recognize how much of themselves show up there.


The part that I really liked are those who claim to know many conservatives that match this list.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top

We're not talking about people on the Internet.

I think that is a key distinction here at JU, but not everywhere on the Internet.  I doubt that this disclaimer would apply to du.org, moveon.org, The Daily Kos, or Puffington Host.