posted
If you answer yes to most of these characteristics you might just be a liberal Democrat if you:
Feel that the bombing of Serbia was justified because Serbia was oppressing Muslim citizens but ousting Saddam was wrong even though he ignored UN resolutions as well as being guilty of torture and murder of hundreds of thousands of Muslims.
Believe that being in favour of executing a mass murderer while opposing abortion on demand is hypocritical, but opposing the death penalty but favoring no limits on abortion is not.
You are okay with having a prayer at the beginning of each session of congress and the supreme court, and that isn’t a violation of the constitution but having a prayer before the opening of a high school football game is.
Read a headline “Woman shoots intruder in her home” and you wonder what sentence in jail she deserves.
Believe that a white kid from a single parent, low-income home is less deserving of college admittance than a non-white kid from an affluent background with lower test results.
Would get really uncomfortable if you were at a high school graduation and the female valedictorian gave a speech praising young women who choose to get an education but who also plan on getting married and becoming stay-at-home mothers.
Believe that placing health care in the hands of the same type of bureaucrats that run the welfare department would improve the quality of care in this country.
Believe that actors and journalists are better judges on what’s good for the nation than economists and businesspeople.
That those who question global warming being a factor of human activity are insane no matter what scientific credentials they have, but the hippies who chain themselves to trees are courageous prophets trying to save the world.
You believe that slavery was a western institution and all other civilizations that engaged in it had to be much more humanitarian.
That if a Republican uses a bad word or gesture that indicates severe lack of control and judgement, but if a Democrat does the same thing it shows that they are as human as the rest of us.
That the constitution is a “living” document that must be interpreted to reflect changes in society, decisions from the UN and the EU and needs to be liberally applied in decisions from activist, liberal judges, but if a conservative tries to stick to the boundaries set by the founding fathers then they are dangerous to the rights of the people.
If a public school teacher has a Bible on her desk that is brainwashing her students, but if a teacher reads from the Koran it’s to enlighten students to other cultures.
Dole had no right to talk about his military service in WW2 when running against Clinton in 1996, but Kerry has every right to talk about his military service and make it the foundation of his campaign.
Believe that the “Fairness Doctrine” should be applied against radio stations to force them to carry an equal number of conservative and liberal talk show hosts even if the station is privately owned by a Republican or even if nobody listens to the liberal hosts.
Believe that even though journalists are highly liberal that this doesn’t affect the news they report.
Think donating money to Democrats who pledge to give more taxmoney to welfare is doing a charitable service.
Feel that the believability of a religious leader is directly related to how much of their religion they publicly denounce.
It’s not a violation of tax codes if a church assists a Democratic cause during an election, but it is if a church assists a conservative cause.
Actually believe that rich liberals send their kids to public schools.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, at least it's good to know that michaele8 is sticking to what he does best. If I ever worry that I'm not being exposed to enough insulting propaganda, I need only search on his name.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's funny. I consider myself to be pretty left-wing and liberal, but I find alot of those statements to be pretty accurate.
Posts: 1996 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure you'd know a liberal Democrat, michele8, if one pulled a VW bus into your driveway and shoved a Bob Marley cassette up your cornhole.
Seriously, come back to the real world. This partisian, generalizing BS has got to stop. People like you are why I'm almost ashamed to be a Republican.
Posts: 270 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks digging_holes. Actually, what inspired me on this one was an e-mail from an acquaintence. She sent a copy of "25 Things You Have To Believe To Be a Republican". I thought a lot of it was pretty funny and this was a copy of my reply to her.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If there weren't equivalent people on the left, I'd be ashamed. As it is, I toss up the phenomenom to human frailty unassociated with a particular political viewpoint.
posted
Why don't you post the original Republican one, just to even things out? Some people seem to take things so seriously. Posts: 1996 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Those must be the descriptions of Liberal Democrats.
And since nobody believes in those things, Liberal Democrats must not exist.
So, all the conservatives like him, who really want to show President Bush a lesson because he is pandering to these non-existant liberals and the wishy-washy moderates, and not taking up true all-American conservative values, well, we can just stay home on election day.
There is nothing to worry about.
Since there are no Democratic Liberals to vote for Kerry, there is no way he can win.
And why are there no Democratic Liberals? Because the definitions of Democratic Liberals this troll has put out is so nasty, no one has ever said any of these things, so no one must be a one.
They are all the imagination of the wishy-washy middle ground undecided people.
Since only Liberal Democrats would vote for Kerry, no one will vote for Kerry.
Yet, we must teach President Bush a lesson before he wanders into non-conservative middle ground land.
So all you rabid conservatives can teach him that lesson by staying home.
posted
Mean Old Frisco, I wasn't aware that Bob Marley was involved in this. Most of the people I know who are into his music are hard-core Nader supporters. One time I was soaking in a natural hotspring some of the ones that fequent the spot (and they know my stands on the issues) invited me to a big Rainbow (hippie) gathering. Sad to say I could not make it because I had to work. If not, I would have gone since I know lots of Green-type liberals and get along with them pretty good. It's upper class liberals I just can't stand. They are way more materialistic than any Orange County suburbanite, yet they want to pretend to be for the working class.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
It's not the taking seriously, it's the taking it ad nauseum. More people listen to your tune when you do more than play the same note over and over.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Digging_holes, nah, you can find it on the website of the California Democratic Party I believe.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: And since nobody believes in those things, Liberal Democrats must not exist.
Uhhh.. I think you should read the news. I dunno what it's actually like living down there, but as a Canadian, all I hear coming up from the states is ridiculously polarized partisan views like this.
I get the impression you people are getting overly offended because it hit a little bit too close to home.
Posts: 1996 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Its worth pointing out that when it refers to Republicans its specifically referring to the neoconservative group that currently controls Republican party policy.
Some of the (indisputable, one would think) misuses of public funds and authority are particularly shameful.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, what part of Canada? My brother in law is visiting his fiance's family in Alberta for the summer.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Feel that the bombing of Serbia was justified because Serbia was oppressing Muslim citizens but ousting Saddam was wrong even though he ignored UN resolutions as well as being guilty of torture and murder of hundreds of thousands of Muslims.
I don't know enough about the bombing of Serbia to comment. I believe that the ousting of Saddma was a good idea done at the wrong time.
Believe that being in favour of executing a mass murderer while opposing abortion on demand is hypocritical, but opposing the death penalty but favoring no limits on abortion is not.
What if you're pro-choice and the existing abortion laws (which are not "no limits" and never have been) and pro-death penalty only if DNA or video evidence provides conclusive proof of guilt?
You are okay with having a prayer at the beginning of each session of congress and the supreme court, and that isn’t a violation of the constitution but having a prayer before the opening of a high school football game is.
I'm not happy with either, frankly, but as long as the schools rotate religious leaders (including atheists) the way that Congress and the Supreme Court does, I can deal.
Read a headline “Woman shoots intruder in her home” and you wonder what sentence in jail she deserves.
Nope. Guy breaks into her house in this state, she can shoot.
Believe that a white kid from a single parent, low-income home is less deserving of college admittance than a non-white kid from an affluent background with lower test results.
More deserving of college admittance, no. More deserving of assistance to attend college, maybe. I favor dropping all affirmative action laws in college admittance, AND admittance on legacies, people whose parents just bought a library, and anything else other than merit.
Would get really uncomfortable if you were at a high school graduation and the female valedictorian gave a speech praising young women who choose to get an education but who also plan on getting married and becoming stay-at-home mothers.
Not at all. The important thing about the feminist movement was that women discovered they didn't have to be stay-at-home mothers. The biggest mistake of the feminist movement was in insulting and looking down on women who chose to stay at home anyway. My wife is a stay-at-home mom, by choice.
Believe that placing health care in the hands of the same type of bureaucrats that run the welfare department would improve the quality of care in this country.
Give me a week to research it and I'll let you know. However, it should be pointed out that welfare is a lot better off now than it was 10 years ago, before a democratic president and a republican congress pushed through the welfare reform bill.
Believe that actors and journalists are better judges on what’s good for the nation than economists and businesspeople.
I'd give the actor just as much credibility as I'd give somebody in any other profession that isn't directly related to the government. Some might know what they're talking about, some might not. Fame does not guarantee intelligence, or even sense. No journalist should be telling me what to believe: as soon as they do they cease to be journalists. They're commentators or columnists or editorial writers. Economists get more credibility with me since that is, in fact, their job, but I also want to make sure they don't have their own agenda by seeing who backs their work. Why should I believe that businesspeople as a class have anything in mind other than improving their business? I welcome and applaud the ones that do, but they're in the minority. I see no reason that MegaCorp wants anything more than profits for MegaCorp. Which is fine, until someone who profits from MegaCorp crafts policy whose sole purpose is to benefit MegaCorp.
That those who question global warming being a factor of human activity are insane no matter what scientific credentials they have, but the hippies who chain themselves to trees are courageous prophets trying to save the world.
I think more research into global warming is needed, so far I'm undecided. I suspect that global warming would have happened whether we were here or not, but that cutting back on our emissions might slow things down and would be a good idea anyway. Some tree-huggers have fought the good fight against unscrupulous companies, some tree-huggers have been over-reacting Luddites who block industry even when it would be beneficial. Depends.
You believe that slavery was a western institution and all other civilizations that engaged in it had to be much more humanitarian.
Nope. Just about every civilization has had slavery at some point.
That if a Republican uses a bad word or gesture that indicates severe lack of control and judgement, but if a Democrat does the same thing it shows that they are as human as the rest of us.
Depends on the usage. If a politician swears after he hits his thumb with a hammer or during an interview aimed at an adult audience it doesn't bother me at all. If a politician swears during a heated exchange in public, or calls someone names where it can be recorded, or uses it in an interview aimed at a general audience, then I have problems with it.
That the constitution is a “living” document that must be interpreted to reflect changes in society, decisions from the UN and the EU and needs to be liberally applied in decisions from activist, liberal judges, but if a conservative tries to stick to the boundaries set by the founding fathers then they are dangerous to the rights of the people.
Wow, there is absolutely no gray in your world, is there? The constitution is a historical document that should never have a single word changed. Amendments to the constitution, which have been added since day one, reflect further interpretations (remember, the Bill of Rights is actually the first 10 amendments). What was the amendment to end slavery, or the one that provided women's voting rights, if not a reflection of changing social mores? Calling the judge an activist liberal doesn't tell me the issue. I would have to judge this one on a case-by-case basis.
If a public school teacher has a Bible on her desk that is brainwashing her students, but if a teacher reads from the Koran it’s to enlighten students to other cultures.
I don't care if a teacher has a Bible. Or if kids bring them to school. Or if kids have after-school Bible meetings. I do care if the teacher discriminates against students who are not CHristian, or if the school appears to promote one religion over the rest, whether by morning prayer announcements or by posting the ten commandments by itself.
Dole had no right to talk about his military service in WW2 when running against Clinton in 1996, but Kerry has every right to talk about his military service and make it the foundation of his campaign.
Dunno, what was the reason against Dole? I don't remember.
Believe that the “Fairness Doctrine” should be applied against radio stations to force them to carry an equal number of conservative and liberal talk show hosts even if the station is privately owned by a Republican or even if nobody listens to the liberal hosts.
Nope. Let the stations program as they want, it's their business.
Believe that even though journalists are highly liberal that this doesn’t affect the news they report.
Since my boss is a journalist and is very Republican this statement is already suspect, but I know for a fact the rest is accurate. Reporters (and editors and publishers and station owners, etc) pick and choose what to report and how to report it, and bias is in every aspect of journalism, left and right. The trick is to figure out the facts anyway.
Think donating money to Democrats who pledge to give more taxmoney to welfare is doing a charitable service.
Nope. It's contributing to a political party, nothing more or less.
Feel that the believability of a religious leader is directly related to how much of their religion they publicly denounce.
I feel that the believability of a religious leader is directly related to how they act when the camera is off. A leader who denounces his own faith isn't much of a religious leader, I wouldn't think.
It’s not a violation of tax codes if a church assists a Democratic cause during an election, but it is if a church assists a conservative cause.
It's a violation of tax codes if a church assists either one. It's not a violation if church members choose to.
Actually believe that rich liberals send their kids to public schools.
Some do. Some don't. I'd have to check.
Any more? What kind of liberal does this make me?
[ July 16, 2004, 08:19 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: That the constitution is a “living” document that must be interpreted to reflect changes in society, decisions from the UN and the EU and needs to be liberally applied in decisions from activist, liberal judges, but if a conservative tries to stick to the boundaries set by the founding fathers then they are dangerous to the rights of the people.
Last I looked it was the conservatives who wanted to change the constitution.
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to remain even-handed, here's the other side, with my responses.
25 Rules For Being A Good Republican Zepps Commentaries.com
1) Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you are millionaire conservative radio jock, which makes it an "illness" and needs our prayers for "recovery."
Being a drug addict is a physical illness or a mental weakness, depending on the causes. Buying or selling illegal drugs makes you a criminal. I see no reason to prosecute anyone with marijuana unless they're selling it to a minor or driving under the influence. I still favor leaving everything harder than marijuana illegal.
2) You have to believe that those privileged from birth achieve success all on their own.
Some people born privileged have indeed become successful on their own. Many more have ridden on their families success and connections. I don't immediately assume that this is a bad thing, however.
3) You have to be against government programs, but expect your Social Security checks on time.
All government programs? Couldn't I just be against the wasteful ones, or the ones that seem to work against their own stated purposes?
4) You have to believe that government should stay out of people's private lives but it needs to punish anyone caught having sex with the "wrong" gender.
I'd be firmly in the "stay out of peoples' business" camp, I think.
5) You have to believe that pollution is ok, so long as it makes a profit.
Some pollution is OK, provided that care is taken to minimize the long term effects on the environment and the people/animals living nearby. This is the "Don't Crap In Your Nest" theory of industry.
6) You have to believe in prayer in schools, as long as you don't pray to Allah or Buddha.
I have no problem with individual prayer, only organized prayer.
7) You have to believe that only your own teenagers are still virgins.
Ha.
8) You have to believe that a woman cannot be trusted with decisions about her own body, but that large multinational corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind with no regulation whatsoever.
I believe that women should be trusted with decisions about her own body until the organism in her body develops enough to be considered a person, at which point her decisions become less and less important compared to the life of the little person. When the little person reaches the point when it can live outside her body, the decision is out of her hands and should only be made by a medical professional if he or she decides that the woman's life is in peril. I don't believe that any company should be permitted to conduct business that affects others without some degree of regulation and accountability.
9) You have to believe that you love Jesus and Jesus loves you, and that Jesus shares your hatred of AIDS victims, homosexuals, and Hillary Clinton.
Got me there, I'm apatheist. Jesus hung out with some pretty strange people, though.
10) You hate the ACLU for representing convicted felons, but they owed it to the country to bail out Oliver North.
I think the ACLU has admirable ideals and I supoort many things they do, but they can also pick some pretty stupid cases.
11) You have to believe that it was wise to allow Ken Starr to spend $50 million dollars to attack Clinton because no other U.S. presidents have ever been unfaithful to their wives.
I don't think Starr should have been allowed to attack Clinton. I also don't think Clinton should be getting hummers on my time and I'm pretty peeved that he lied to my face about it.
12) You have to believe that group sex is a degenerate sin that can only be purged by running for governor of California as a Republican.
Group sex can be a lot of fun as long as you remember where you put your car keys.
13) You have to believe it is wise to keep condoms out of schools, because we all know if teenagers don't have condoms they won't have sex.
I favor condoms being made accessible, I'm undecided about letting schools distribute them. I'd much rather that every parent in America be open enough with their kids so that either the kids wouldn't need condoms or could get them from the parents instead.
14) You have to believe that the ACLU is bad because they defend the Constitution, while the NRA is good because they defend the Constitution.
See above. The ACLU has done some good things and some stupid things; so has the NRA.
15) You have to believe that government medicare is wrong and that HMOs and insurance companies only have your best interests at heart.
I think that government medicare could be adminstered a hell of a lot better, and that HMOs and insurance companies have their own interests at heart, as they should. I only complain when their interests violate my own.
16) You have to believe the AIDS virus is not important enough to deserve federal funding proportionate to the resulting death rate and that the public doesn't need to be educated about it, because if we just ignore it, it will go away.
AIDS deserves all the money we can throw at it. So does every other currently uncurable, fatal disease.
17) You have to believe that biology teachers are corrupting the morals of 6th graders if they teach them the basics of human sexuality, but the Bible, which is full of sex and violence, is just good reading. ]/i]
Teachers should be teaching the basics of human [i]reproduction. Human sexuality should be taught at home. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to happen very often, so teachers do what they can. Parents should be able to keep their kids out of it according to their own beliefs. The Bible should be taught as the powerhouse of history, poetry, mythology, and moral guide that it is. It should not be used as a source for science, biology, astronomy, or any other physical science. However, evolution should not be taught as a done deal either, just as the currently-favored theory.
18) You have to believe that atheism is a religion but that creationism is just good science.
I do think atheism is a religion, or at least a faith, and I've pissed off quite a few atheists that way. But if you have no evidence and make a decision anyway, sorry, that's a faith. Creationism is using scientific jargon to explain a myth.
19) You have to believe that Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney was doing business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
I think that Saddam was a bad guy the whole time. U.S. policy seems to be to find tough guys who can rally support and fight the dirty battles we don't want to fight. Not a bad notion, until the guys we arm start becoming threats in their own right.
20) You have to believe that the lumber from the last one percent of old growth U.S. forests is well worth the destruction of those forests and the extinction of the several species of plants and animals therein.
Old growth forests take longer to regrow. We should be intelligent enough to take only what we can replace.
21) You believe that the public has "a right to know" about the adulterous affairs of Democrats, while those of Republicans are a "private matter".
I think the public has a right to know about a politician's beliefs, voting record, and financial dealings during that politician's time in office. Their personal life, as long as it remains legal, is their own. I do not think that Senator Ryan's divorce records should have been made public, for example.
22) You have to believe that the public has a right to know what the government is doing but that Bush was right to censor those 28 pages from the Congressional 9/11 report because you just can't handle the truth.
I think the public has a right to know anything that is not restricted due to sensitive information, but that there must be checks and balances built into the system. Someone has to able to call even the president to task when its necessary. We have three branches of government for a reason, none of them should be able to trump the others.
23) You support state rights, which means Ashcroft telling states what locally passed voter initiate he will allow them to have.
I support states rights and very little Ashcroft has ever said.
24) You have to believe that Aid to Mothers with Dependent children is wasteful, but giving tax breaks to companies moving American jobs overseas is just what government is for.
Not only do I disagree with giving tax breaks to comapnies that move overseas, but I think that any company that moves its headquarters out of the country to avoid taxes should be excluded from government contracts.
25) You have to believe that trade with Cuba is wrong because it is communist, but trading with China and Vietnam is just dandy.
Trade with all of them, it keeps communication lines open and eventually our decadent way of life will corrupt them from within.
Hmm. I'm a worse Republican than a Democrat, but not by much.
[ July 16, 2004, 09:02 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reading Michaele8's little "quiz" reminded me of a PeTA rag that I read at work once (our boss would routinely leave them in the break room). Basically, they asked a bunch of loaded questions and if you answered yes to even one of them (to a question like: Do you crave meat at least once a month (or every 6 months)?), you were addicted to meat.
Anyways, good job cranking out the anti-democratic, anti-liberal propoganda, Michaele8! Without you, we wouldn't know what to think of those people!
Edit: For the record, I'm an independant liberal (I lean towards more democratic candidates, but my family is republican).
posted
Comrade ChrisBridges, I have a question about your 'atheism' (point 18) response. It goes in stages, so bear with me. First, let me define my own standpoint : I am an atheist; if pushed, I will retreat to a previously prepared position of aggressive agnosticism, to wit, "I don't know anything about God and neither do you so shut up now."
Now then, why am I an atheist? Because I reason thusly : If there is no God, there is no need for worship. If there is a God, as described in <fill in faith>'s holy books, he is a rather nasty sort, not at all the type I want to hang out with. The logical action, therefore, is to not worship.
Now, this is not a decision based on no information, which indeed is a faith. It is a case where both possibilities of a binary option lead to the same course of action. Of course, you are free to disagree with that course of action, but that's not the point. Is this still faith?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This will be the 6,433,344rd time that I've seen this list or something like it on a forum. Congratulations on being just another cog in a machine. Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM: Your decision doesn't involve faith since it makes no difference to you what you believe, only in the probably outcomes of either decision. You have not made a decision on the existence (or nonexistence) of God at all, you have merely decided how you will deal with the question. Therefore, you are not an atheist. You are, like me, an apatheist. Our proud slogan: "Don't Know, Don't Care." Although yours might be more appropriately, "Doesn't Matter."
[ July 17, 2004, 01:03 AM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
To say that Atheism is a faith is to imply that by default, everyone believes in a higher being and an atheist has made a choice not to. To me, "atheist" merely means without belief. Not active disbelief.
Posts: 270 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fair enough. Your mileage may vary. I'd argue that by default, everyone is agnostic. It's only when you have to decide what you believe that faith comes into it.
Of course, I have a somewhat wider definition of "agnostic" than most people...
[ July 17, 2004, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm. How does one distinguish between someone who "does not believe," and someone who "actively disbelieves?" Looks like a purely semantic distinction to me.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you asked me which team was better, the Miami Dolphins or the New England Patriots, I couldn't tell you. I have absolutely no belief either direction. I don't care. It has no bearing on my day-to-day life whatsoever.
If I were forced to choose, possibly at gunpoint, I'd pick the one I'd heard the most favorable things about. I'd rely on faith that the people telling me about the two teams and their stats were accurate and reliable. Until I was forced to decide, I needed no faith because the question simply didn't matter to me.
This is, of course, a poor analogy since I can check the teams' stats myself and it is a certainty that one could be judged better than the other. God's existence or nonexistence cannot be judged conclusively by any means other than subjective, and so that decision can never be made with anything other than faith.
Interesting, though, that of all the things I said in my two big posts this is the only one getting discussion.
[ July 18, 2004, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not sure you'd know a liberal Democrat, michele8, if one pulled a VW bus into your driveway and shoved a Bob Marley cassette up your cornhole.
And I'd like my album back, if you don't mind, when you're through with it.
Posts: 1862 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not sure you'd know a liberal Democrat, michele8, if one pulled a VW bus into your driveway and shoved a Bob Marley cassette up your cornhole.
And I'd like my album back, if you don't mind, when you're through with it.
Posts: 1862 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's not the taking seriously, it's the taking it ad nauseum. More people listen to your tune when you do more than play the same note over and over.
Ding ding ding - we have a winner!
The problem is that grossly oversimplifying the other side's position makes it impossible to convincingly sell the kernel (very small kernel in some of these) of truth underlying each statement in both lists.
posted
How can Chris Bridges be funny and intellectual?
It's a mystery, really it is, how one man can contain what some view as antitheticals within the same body of flesh and bone.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there some sort of test that you can take to tell you what political party you belong to? Something with more options than just democrat or republican?
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with polictical tests is that they'll simplify the questions too much, so that you may agree with one aspect of a policy, but disagree with another policy related to it, and the question is always what do you think of these policies together? If someone has a really long, waste-of-time poltical quiz I'd like to take that though...
quote:Libertarians support a great deal of liberty and freedom of choice in both personal and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to protect people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility, and they tolerate economic and social diversity.
posted
Of course, one way of being convincing is just repeating the same thing over and over again no matter what the facts are. For instance, keep saying substantial link between Al Quaeda and Iraq and most of the country will keep believing you, even if you don't have the evidence to support that claim at all. Take a look, its still working.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The WSPQ quiz says I am Libertarian...I never would have thought that.
ON the LP one I scored 3 for Green, 1 for Democrat, and 1 each for Libertarian and Republican. ( I am registered Green).
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've identified myself as a libertarian for a few years. Mainly because the things that interest me, like intellectual property and patent laws as they apply to software, are hurting progress, not helping it. Since it's the government who creates and enforces these screwy laws, and neither the left nor the right seems to care much about it, I've become very anti-authority in that case. I'm also rabidly opposed to social security and I'm against a monolithic federal government (which we have today).
If the software world started to slide the way I want it to, then I'd probably become pretty quickly centrist.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
How can Chris Bridges be funny and intellectual?
There are lots of funny intellectuals. Not all of them intend to be funny, but...
The reason I'm registered Independent, and the reason I come up Centrist in these quizzes (even the heavily slanted ones), is because the notion of aligning myself with a political party confuses me.
Shouldn't every issue be judged on its own merits, rather than how the party platform says it must be judged? Some problems might be solved by throwing money at them, others by allocating existing money more sensibly. Some problems might be solved with governmental control. Some problems might be solved by getting the government out of the situation. And some problems may not be solvable, no matter how many bumper stickers you pass out.
Even if every one of my opinions matched, say, the Libertarians (they don't), I wouldn't consider myself Libertarian for the simple reason that when an issue arises I wouldn't go to the Libertarian web site to find out what my opinion is. I would research and investigate and make my own opinion.
I don't consider this intellectual at all. I consider it the responsibility of a citizen.
[ July 20, 2004, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
Chris Bridges![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
)
