mainardi
12-15-2005, 02:56 AM
"Long-time reader, first-time political thread starter..."
I decided to see if I could make something of the "liberal thinkers" on this board, so I did the first logical thing I could think of... I went to dictionary.com and looked up the word "liberal".
For the purposes of this thread it boils down to this (my emphasis in italics):
1a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
1b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
I thought myself to be more of a "conservative" -- dictionary.com uses phrases like "favoring traditional views and values, tending to oppose change, moderate, cautious" -- so I was surprised to note that the italicized words above often describe "conservatives" as well. What really struck me is that most of the supposed "liberals" in the world -- at least those portrayed by the "liberal" media -- do NOT meet the definition above.
How so? Lets take 'em one at a time...
:ThmbDown: free from bigotry - this forum has more than it's fair share of those who are intolerant and predjudiced against others -- on both sides of the political ledger BTW -- but "liberals" are supposed to be above this pettiness. Of course, bigotry is a human condition, so the "liberals" expect a free pass on this one. :rolleyes:
:ThmbDown: open to new ideas for progress - I know that the "liberals" will not agree, but I see the freeing of the Iraqi people as progress. We tried the "please, please, pretty please Saddam, stop torturing and murdering your own people" route, and coddled his regime... and he repayed the world by lining his own pockets with the "oil-for-food" scam (shame on you, UN), making Iraq a haven for terrorists, and stepping up his "ethnic cleansing" (Arian Nation, anyone?). So we finally got a President with the cojones to try and stop the madness and create an opportunity for progress for the Iraqi people, and it's no surprise who opposes it. BTW, anybody remember how overwhelming the vote was to go to war? It was convenient for liberals to be "patriotic" (read: ensure their own re-election) at first, and then start backpedalling as soon as it was good for their political futures. :mad:
:ThmbDown: tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others - I defer to the rhetoric of the most intolerant of those "liberals" on this forum... no doubt you'll be proving it in this very thread. :p
:ThmbDown: broad-minded - the antonym is "narrrow-minded", which dictionary.com defines as "lacking tolerance, breadth of view, or sympathy; petty"... just about sums up the motley crew of "liberals" that frequent these pages. :)
I wish that I could understand how a group of people could take such a beautiful word and twist it to lose its meaning. Maybe they should give the word back and choose a new word for what they are... hey "liberals", "cynic" is available!!! ;)
I decided to see if I could make something of the "liberal thinkers" on this board, so I did the first logical thing I could think of... I went to dictionary.com and looked up the word "liberal".
For the purposes of this thread it boils down to this (my emphasis in italics):
1a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
1b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
I thought myself to be more of a "conservative" -- dictionary.com uses phrases like "favoring traditional views and values, tending to oppose change, moderate, cautious" -- so I was surprised to note that the italicized words above often describe "conservatives" as well. What really struck me is that most of the supposed "liberals" in the world -- at least those portrayed by the "liberal" media -- do NOT meet the definition above.
How so? Lets take 'em one at a time...
:ThmbDown: free from bigotry - this forum has more than it's fair share of those who are intolerant and predjudiced against others -- on both sides of the political ledger BTW -- but "liberals" are supposed to be above this pettiness. Of course, bigotry is a human condition, so the "liberals" expect a free pass on this one. :rolleyes:
:ThmbDown: open to new ideas for progress - I know that the "liberals" will not agree, but I see the freeing of the Iraqi people as progress. We tried the "please, please, pretty please Saddam, stop torturing and murdering your own people" route, and coddled his regime... and he repayed the world by lining his own pockets with the "oil-for-food" scam (shame on you, UN), making Iraq a haven for terrorists, and stepping up his "ethnic cleansing" (Arian Nation, anyone?). So we finally got a President with the cojones to try and stop the madness and create an opportunity for progress for the Iraqi people, and it's no surprise who opposes it. BTW, anybody remember how overwhelming the vote was to go to war? It was convenient for liberals to be "patriotic" (read: ensure their own re-election) at first, and then start backpedalling as soon as it was good for their political futures. :mad:
:ThmbDown: tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others - I defer to the rhetoric of the most intolerant of those "liberals" on this forum... no doubt you'll be proving it in this very thread. :p
:ThmbDown: broad-minded - the antonym is "narrrow-minded", which dictionary.com defines as "lacking tolerance, breadth of view, or sympathy; petty"... just about sums up the motley crew of "liberals" that frequent these pages. :)
I wish that I could understand how a group of people could take such a beautiful word and twist it to lose its meaning. Maybe they should give the word back and choose a new word for what they are... hey "liberals", "cynic" is available!!! ;)