If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Townhall)   Five virtues that liberals take to the extreme   (townhall.com) divider line 56
    More: Amusing, liberals, Occupy protests  
•       •       •

1854 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Feb 2014 at 8:26 AM (29 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-02-11 08:11:37 AM
15 votes:
5 things that conservatives appear to consider virtues

Greed
Selfishness
religious intolerance
self pity
ignorance
2014-02-11 08:18:33 AM
10 votes:

somedude210: Caring about their fellow man?


Pretty much, yeah.

The older I get, the more I realize that, to be a capital-C Conservative in 2014, you need to be some combination of mean, angry, ignorant, and scared. And that's got to be a horrible way to live every day. It really makes me feel sorry for them, in a way. Which, I guess, is a very liberal thing to say.
2014-02-11 08:10:33 AM
6 votes:
1) Tolerance
2) Compassion
3) Being nicer
4) Self esteem
5) Diversity

Yeah, these are destroying EVERYTHING...
2014-02-11 10:43:28 AM
5 votes:

hubiestubert: 1) Tolerance
2) Compassion
3) Being nicer
4) Self esteem
5) Diversity

Yeah, these are destroying EVERYTHING...


Wait - that's the list? Honestly?

Who in the hell thinks it's somehow "bad" to celebrate tolerance, compassion, niceness, self-esteem, and diversity? Who in the hell thinks that those should be somehow "balanced" by a moderate amount of intolerance, ruthlessness, nastiness, self-loathing, and bigotry?

Is this the message of the conservatives? Really? I know there are a lot of question marks here, but that's because I'm frankly surprised and appalled - here I was, thinking, "wow, those qualities are part of what enlighten us", but then this article comes along and implies that, well, we shouldn't be too enlightened, because that would mean you wouldn't be conservatives.

I mean, this schumck, while preaching against tolerance, actually said "Yes, the Bible does say, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." However..." - this asshole thinks he can gainsay Jesus, for Christ's sake. I wonder, when this schmuck goes to church, if he thinks, "Sure, I'm Christian - but, I'm not too Christian, if you know what I mean, because that whole 'turning the other cheek' thing is for suckers." Oh, holy shiat, I underestimated this asshole - according to his own quote, he probably walks into a church that prominently features a man who allowed himself to be nailed to a cross in return for his teachings and thinks, "At best, compassion doesn't mean much and at worst it has become an act of destructive self-congratulation." Yeah, Jesus would clap to celebrate his own bon mot, except for those friggin' nails piercing his friggin' palms, you complete and utter waste of protoplasm.

Who farking read this article and went, "Huh. That John Hawkins fella, he's got the right idea..."? If this is what drives conservative philosophy, well, fark you.
2014-02-11 11:19:22 AM
4 votes:

A Cave Geek: Look, philosophically, reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.


Or one side could simply be wrong.

"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." - Isaac Asimov
2014-02-11 10:18:17 AM
4 votes:

Dwight_Yeast: hubiestubert: 1) Tolerance
2) Compassion
3) Being nicer
4) Self esteem
5) Diversity

Yeah, these are destroying EVERYTHING...

Well, to some extent American liberals doing those things (trying to be helpful, fair and inclusive) has helped create create the modern American conservative movement.

/Every time I see a Conservative demanding that religion be treated as science in schools, all I can think is "Well, there's the "multculturalism run rampant we were warned about!"


Therein lies the rub. I DO blame Bill Clinton a bit for the state of affairs within the GOP. When he moved towards the center during his Presidency, the NeoCons then were push-pulled towards more extremist stances, in order to distance themselves from the Democrats. That was the Rove influence, and it became even more prevalent when GW took to the office, but the contrarian element took off, to oppose EVERYTHING in order to be different, and then fill in the blanks for reasoning by handing off the logic behind those moves and statements to a unified team, in media, in academia, in print, on the air, and in that sense, the "modern" Conservative press and media were born.

Before that, it was a lot of disparate voices, some of whom weren't all that far removed from their counterparts across the aisle. Their reasoning might have been slightly different, but they could agree on some issues. Now, the brand is such, and the narrative is so important, the will to create reality through entirely subjective means--and yes, I'm looking at the NeoCons and their thinktanks for this willful misunderstanding of the concept of "subjective reality" that their Ivory Tower academicians for advancing--is choking off the strengths that the Conservatives to nothing but virulently contrarian stances.

"If'n he's a fer it, I'hm ag'in it!" is a cohesive message, but when you need to then turn to a Justification Machine to give yourselves a unified front, as to why something is  terrible, horrible, no good, very bad and the worstestest idea EVAR in the history of ideas and policies, it becomes nothing. It's Vapor Policy. And folks are breathing this stuff in, and they like the taste, because they're "sticking it to the Libs" without every understanding why.

There are things that I disagree with Obama about, and in fact many positions within the Democrats as well, but likewise, there are things that we need to work towards, and simply casting EVERYTHING as the worstest drains any real credence from criticism, because it's not based on opposition to the policy, but rather opposition to the man and the party in general. It simply is just being contrary, and seeking to oppose the man, without thought. There are things that I disagreed with GW certainly, but there are a few things that I think he got right. Not many, but a few--on some of his immigration issues--and you have to look at the policies themselves, not just lump in everything because you have personal distaste. GW had a LOT of issues within his Presidency that I think we could have avoided if the party hadn't shafted McCain's bid, but that personal distaste for the man, and his record, doesn't cloud that he did get some things on immigration right, at least with guest workers in particular. The reckless and feckless certainly tend to cast a deep shadow over the rest of his Presidency, and likewise, his behavior within the office, and the spectacular amount of time he spent away from Washington--that is on a more personal note, as every time he went to the ranch, Fort Hood had to shut down, and that devastated the local economy around the base, and that did a number on my father's business. His choices for advisers and policies I can disagree with, but I'd rather put it into specifics, as opposed to just generalized "He was an asshat!"

While I say, I blame Clinton for this, that is more the causative factor. His move towards the center was I think calculated, but folks chose to make their run from those positions. They made their own damn decisions, and while we can pinpoint the moments that our politics grew more divisive and polarized, it has to be remembered that the Far Right built an infrastructure to create and disseminate these views, and use academicians to provide the justifications. That took a lot of forethought, and belief that they could just manufacture reasoning and it would just be swallowed whole. And if you look at Fox News, you can see that there are a LOT of folks who've bet a ton of their living on exactly that, and one should never underestimate the relative stupidity of humanity for that. The party made its choice, and they reward folks for keeping to the vision, that if a Democrat speaks, it is a race to see HOW wrong they are. It's a sh*tty way to run a party, and it saddens me, because it drove me from the party, and it's driving good folks out of politics in general, because it is so virulent and contrary to thought and consideration. And it just sucks away sincerity and integrity from a great many who want to call themselves Conservatives*.

*I use the phrase "call themselves Conservatives" because what we see are radicals leaping to take the title, without understanding its underpinnings. It's a team to them, and that team is "Family Values" and a lot of buzzwords that have little to do with historical perspective, and folks have worked long and hard to turn perception from those roots, and rebrand their radicalized visions as being "Conservative" and it has worked to a startling degree. But it has nothing to do with thoughtful and careful and considered policy, and damn the folks who put amoral and rabidly anti-intellectual asshats in the hot seats, because they are easily manipulated. That investiture of the party into the hands of radicals, who desperately need to distance themselves from anyone questioning their policy has led us to this pass. Because handing over the party to these radicals has drained a great deal from the party, and the nation.
2014-02-11 10:34:58 AM
3 votes:

Serious Black: A Cave Geek: Oh, goodie, another 'liberal vs conservative' thread.

Look, philosophically, reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.  At the moment, it's closer to the liberal view of the world, but that's not to say that the conservative philosophy is completely without merit.  (Their current implementation of that philosophy is another matter)

Basic virtues That both parties agree are valid and good for society in general: (In varying degrees)
- Generosity
- Hard work
- Responsibility
- Creativity
- Courage
- Freedom
- Integrity
- Honor
- Honesty
- Respect
- Kindness

Now, where things get really messy is when you start rating those virtues. While the GOP values generosity, conservatives don't value generosity as highly as they value freedom or responsibility.  Liberals tend to value kindness and generosity more highly than blunt force 'honesty'.

From what I've seen of the GOP, their top virtues that are valued above all others are Freedom, Honor, and Hard work.  All other virtues are relegated to a 'if we have time for them'.  From what I've seen of the liberals, their top three are:  Kindness, generosity, and Creativity.  Most others appear to be an 'if we have time for them'.

Like I said earlier, however, I think the 'perfect balance' of these virtues is much closer to the liberal view than the conservative one.

I think the problem starts well before you rate those virtues. I think it starts just by defining what those virtues are. Take freedom. The most common conception of freedom to people on the more conservative end of the spectrum is the ability to do things unimpeded by the government. But that definition means little to me. What good does the government allowing me to do things do if other people are squelching my ability to do those things? I conceive of liberty as autonomy and self-determination, or the ability to do things unimpeded by all other groups.


A fair enough point.  What good is the 'freedom to work' when there is no work?  What good is the freedom to choose your own vocation if you can only realistically live on a few of them?  I like your definition of liberty.  Yes, that's a very good description. So let's take another look then, just the top 3 for both:
Conservatives
- Freedom:  Ability to do whatever they want with no government ever telling them no, even if that means causing harm to others.
- Hard work:  Doing what you're told, without ever questioning.  Any time you ask for improved conditions/raise/vacation/promotion,/etc, you're a sissy, so stop complaining and get back to work.
- Honor:  From the GOP perspective, I think they mean 'doing all things the same way they've always been done', or rather 'honoring tradition'.  Never question tradition.

Liberals:
- Generosity:  Helping others.  This could be in the form of volunteer hours, donations, or advocating for increased taxes.  Advocacy for those who cannot advocate for themselves, lifting up of the weak, etc. (gawd, that's starting to sound...biblical, isn't it?)
- Kindness:  Liberals tend to like using tact and diplomacy to avoid offending anyone, using violence only as an absolute last resort.  While this often gets them in trouble, they would prefer it if the whole world could be our friend, as opposed to our enemy. Conservatives, by contrast view violence as a perfectly valid 'negotiating' tactic.
- Creativity:  I would define this as valuing solutions over traditions.
2014-02-11 10:10:07 AM
3 votes:

A Cave Geek: Oh, goodie, another 'liberal vs conservative' thread.

Look, philosophically, reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.  At the moment, it's closer to the liberal view of the world, but that's not to say that the conservative philosophy is completely without merit.  (Their current implementation of that philosophy is another matter)

Basic virtues That both parties agree are valid and good for society in general: (In varying degrees)
- Generosity
- Hard work
- Responsibility
- Creativity
- Courage
- Freedom
- Integrity
- Honor
- Honesty
- Respect
- Kindness

Now, where things get really messy is when you start rating those virtues. While the GOP values generosity, conservatives don't value generosity as highly as they value freedom or responsibility.  Liberals tend to value kindness and generosity more highly than blunt force 'honesty'.

From what I've seen of the GOP, their top virtues that are valued above all others are Freedom, Honor, and Hard work.  All other virtues are relegated to a 'if we have time for them'.  From what I've seen of the liberals, their top three are:  Kindness, generosity, and Creativity.  Most others appear to be an 'if we have time for them'.

Like I said earlier, however, I think the 'perfect balance' of these virtues is much closer to the liberal view than the conservative one.


I think the problem starts well before you rate those virtues. I think it starts just by defining what those virtues are. Take freedom. The most common conception of freedom to people on the more conservative end of the spectrum is the ability to do things unimpeded by the government. But that definition means little to me. What good does the government allowing me to do things do if other people are squelching my ability to do those things? I conceive of liberty as autonomy and self-determination, or the ability to do things unimpeded by all other groups.
2014-02-11 09:28:55 AM
3 votes:

Mikey1969: Diversity is a strength? Tell that to Afghanistan or Iraq.

Holy crap, The US is about a million times more diverse. Dumbass doesn't realize that the only "diversity" in places like Iraq and Afghanistan is the specific flavor of the same farking religion that they ALL follow. It would be like if the US was only Protestants and Methodists, or something.


The problem is that conservatives truly believe there really ARE only two factions in the US: "Us" and "Them".  Thus you get the bizarre assertions that feminists want to implement Sharia law, or Richard Dawkins is sympathetic to Islam, or that poor people want government-subsidized health insurance to cover their gayness.  They can't comprehend the current diversity of America because they believe that everyone who is "Not Us" falls into a single homogeneous mass with the same beliefs and goals.  And likewise why they regularly have their "conservative purity litmus tests" to ensure their side is homogeneous as well.
2014-02-11 08:49:20 AM
3 votes:
None of the things on that list make rich people richer or poor people poorer, so obviously they are a problem.
MFK
2014-02-11 08:45:21 AM
3 votes:
lemme guess... this guy?
wonkette.com
2014-02-11 08:41:33 AM
3 votes:
What a sad little article. Those are virtues that liberals may carry to excess, but conservatives barely indulge in at all. Who after all was it that said "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice"?Once again, the underlying complaint is that white people are on the verge of ceasing to be the majority in this country. Cry some more.
2014-02-11 08:39:06 AM
3 votes:

MayoSlather: Compassion and being nice are taken to the extreme by liberals?

It would take a truly heinous person to point out someone else is being too compassionate.


Conservatives are very stringent in their religion:

24.media.tumblr.com
2014-02-11 10:50:10 AM
2 votes:

Dr Dreidel: A Cave Geek: Liberals tend to like using tact and diplomacy to avoid offending anyone, using violence only as an absolute last resort. While this often gets them in trouble, they would prefer it if the whole world could be our friend, as opposed to our enemy. Conservatives, by contrast view violence as a perfectly valid 'negotiating' tactic.

And yet, one of the refrains I hear from the more objectivist Republicans is that the government has a monopoly on state violence, and that this is a bad thing.

I don't know if This Means Something, but the focus on violence as the "prime mover" of economy, diplomacy, etc, is kind of revealing.


This may be grossly generalizing, but here we go.

Liberal idiom on violence: measure twice, cut once.
Conservative idiom on violence: shoot first, ask questions later.
2014-02-11 10:42:58 AM
2 votes:

Gonz: somedude210: Caring about their fellow man?

Pretty much, yeah.

The older I get, the more I realize that, to be a capital-C Conservative in 2014, you need to be some combination of mean, angry, ignorant, and scared. And that's got to be a horrible way to live every day. It really makes me feel sorry for them, in a way. Which, I guess, is a very liberal thing to say.


Those are the effect of listening to (watching) right-wing rhetoric. To be a Conservative, you just have to be selfish.
2014-02-11 10:29:34 AM
2 votes:
vir·tue
[ vúrchoo ]
  1. goodness: the quality of being morally good or righteous
  2. good quality: a quality that is morally good
  3. admirable quality: a quality that is good or admirable, but not necessarily in terms of morality

How can you take a virtue "to an extreme?" By definition, a virtue is something to which we should aspire, and something that everyone should practice. In theory, taking a virtue "to an extreme" should be cause for praise and emulation. That's the whole friggin' point of a virtue.

Oh, wait - this is the GOP. Their motto is "don't lengthen your own line - shorten your opponent's line."
2014-02-11 10:07:50 AM
2 votes:
I literally don't understand how its possible to overdo compassion.
2014-02-11 09:57:59 AM
2 votes:
Not gonna click ... but how can you overdo a "virtue"?

Or ... Maybe they are saying The Seven Sins aren't all bad either?

Maybe:
"Everything in moderation, including moderation." --Oscar Wilde
2014-02-11 09:42:08 AM
2 votes:

Marcus Aurelius: Gonz: somedude210: Caring about their fellow man?

Pretty much, yeah.

The older I get, the more I realize that, to be a capital-C Conservative in 2014, you need to be some combination of mean, angry, ignorant, and scared. And that's got to be a horrible way to live every day. It really makes me feel sorry for them, in a way. Which, I guess, is a very liberal thing to say.

Mostly scared.  Questioning anything scares the piss out of them.  Not to mention reality.  Reality is the most frightening thing of all.


One of the single best predictors of right wing authoritarian views is how someone scores on something called The Dangerous World test. They have been shown repeatedly and empirically to just be cowards.
2014-02-11 09:34:14 AM
2 votes:

Mjeck: Fast Moon: Mikey1969: Diversity is a strength? Tell that to Afghanistan or Iraq.

Holy crap, The US is about a million times more diverse. Dumbass doesn't realize that the only "diversity" in places like Iraq and Afghanistan is the specific flavor of the same farking religion that they ALL follow. It would be like if the US was only Protestants and Methodists, or something.

The problem is that conservatives truly believe there really ARE only two factions in the US: "Us" and "Them".  Thus you get the bizarre assertions that feminists want to implement Sharia law, or Richard Dawkins is sympathetic to Islam, or that poor people want government-subsidized health insurance to cover their gayness.  They can't comprehend the current diversity of America because they believe that everyone who is "Not Us" falls into a single homogeneous mass with the same beliefs and goals.  And likewise why they regularly have their "conservative purity litmus tests" to ensure their side is homogeneous as well.

I once had a Catholic tell me he didn't want to his tax dollars going towards prolapsed anuses


We will just knock it off the 'not paying taxes' tab his church has run up.
2014-02-11 09:11:45 AM
2 votes:
Wow. Life in the echo chamber, where narrative replaced reality a long time ago.
2014-02-11 08:37:03 AM
2 votes:
Yes, the Bible does say, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." However, it doesn't say there's no difference between the Bible and the Koran,....
It doesn't say that there is a difference either. I think if you look through the Bible, you won't see a single reference to the Koran. There's a reason...the bible kinda predates the Koran by a millenia or so. But, if you look through a Koran and the Old Testament, you're going to see references to a lot of the same characters. And, the Koran also has lots of moral guidance that is in alignment with the moral guidance of the bible. There's also some stuff in there that probably shouldn't be taken literally, and some stuff that seems patently absurd. But the Bible has the same issues too.

America is packed with angry, spiteful, nasty people who never give a dime to charity or personally help a soul; yet they consider themselves to be deeply compassionate for supporting harmful government programs with pleasant-sounding names
What's the "harmful government program with the pleasant-sounding name"?

If all you bring to the table is "nice," you don't have much to offer.
Sounds like you're one of those guys that when someone asks you to describe an unattractive person, you'll say, "Yeah, they're nice".

Tell that to Afghanistan or Iraq. Both nations are so diverse they want to murder each other.
I'd actually argue that Aghanistan and Iraq are definitely NOT diverse. They have just a few small sects of the population. They end up being HIGHLY divided as a result. Here in America we have people from all colors, classes, creeds. We are FAR more diverse than either of those two nations.
2014-02-11 08:29:55 AM
2 votes:
X things that.... Headline?
Townhall link?

I'm going to assume that sweaty fat guy sharted out another blog post.
2014-02-11 10:56:33 PM
1 votes:
"Diversity is a strength? Tell that to Afghanistan or Iraq. Both nations are so diverse they want to murder each other.  "

This may be the worst set of three consecutive sentences I've ever read.
2014-02-11 06:09:18 PM
1 votes:
Right. Because if I want to know how Liberals think, I'm going to go to a right-wing nutjob website.
2014-02-11 04:39:41 PM
1 votes:

dantheman195: Wow, the liberal derp in here is thick


Indeed? Please explain to us how "being nice" is bad.
2014-02-11 04:27:29 PM
1 votes:

A Cave Geek: Oh, goodie, another 'liberal vs conservative' thread.

Look, philosophically, reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.  At the moment, it's closer to the liberal view of the world, but that's not to say that the conservative philosophy is completely without merit.  (Their current implementation of that philosophy is another matter)

Basic virtues That both parties agree are valid and good for society in general: (In varying degrees)
- Generosity
- Hard work
- Responsibility
- Creativity
- Courage
- Freedom
- Integrity
- Honor
- Honesty
- Respect
- Kindness

Now, where things get really messy is when you start rating those virtues. While the GOP values generosity, conservatives don't value generosity as highly as they value freedom or responsibility.  Liberals tend to value kindness and generosity more highly than blunt force 'honesty'.

From what I've seen of the GOP, their top virtues that are valued above all others are Freedom, Honor, and Hard work.  All other virtues are relegated to a 'if we have time for them'.  From what I've seen of the liberals, their top three are:  Kindness, generosity, and Creativity.  Most others appear to be an 'if we have time for them'.

Like I said earlier, however, I think the 'perfect balance' of these virtues is much closer to the liberal view than the conservative one.


I would say you missed a couple major liberal values: equality and fairness (although fairness could arguably be interchanged with a few of these I suppose).  Most of what liberals stand for and fight for is equality whether it be for race, gender, sexual orientation, wealth, etc.

You're right in the sense that we have a different set of values, but it also extends to having a different set of definitions for those words (as someone else mentioned) as well as a different set of goals and fundamental beliefs.  Our neural frameworks are just different.

It really boils down to liberals want to change the world to make it what they perceive to be a better place.  Generally this means that everyone is equal, not discriminated against, and gets along (at least in an ideal world).  In the liberal utopia, everyone gets to do their own thing and we all work together to prevent people from harming each other (whether it be physically or emotionally).  Sometimes that means regulations against corporations who want to harm people, sometimes that just means rules against bullies.  They want freedom and liberty in the form of everyone being free as long as they are playing nice with each other.

Conservatives also want to make the world to be what they perceive to be a better place, but in their view, a better place means everyone follows the rules of a true authority (it's important that they perceive the authority to be legitimate though and that can only be someone who's just like them or traditionally the type who has been a leader previously).  They don't want people to be equal, they like hierarchies where people have to earn their right to work their way up the ranks, and unfortunately for some, that simply isn't possible due to their unfortunate luck to not be born into the dominant group whatever it may be.  They want everyone to respect the hierarchy and know their place and to never question it thus creating structure and tradition.  They take comfort in knowing that people aren't doing things they don't agree with, and if they are, the authority has the right to persecute and punish that individual.  Ironically they don't like laws or rules that allow others to make decisions that they don't agree with or that forces them to respect others.  They see this as an infringement of their freedom.  They want freedom and liberty in the form of everyone being free to hurt, discriminate against, persecute, and force their will on those lower in the hierarchy than them.  It's no coincidence that conservatives have tended to belong to traditionally privileged groups (rich, dominant race, straight, male, dominant religion).  They want to maintain their dominance and privilege while ensuring that others cannot have what they have as they like to feel superior.
2014-02-11 02:43:32 PM
1 votes:

Dwight_Yeast: hubiestubert: 1) Tolerance
2) Compassion
3) Being nicer
4) Self esteem
5) Diversity

Yeah, these are destroying EVERYTHING...

Well, to some extent American liberals doing those things (trying to be helpful, fair and inclusive) has helped create create the modern American conservative movement.

/Every time I see a Conservative demanding that religion be treated as science in schools, all I can think is "Well, there's the "multculturalism run rampant we were warned about!"


Conservatives have been persecuting and killing people they don't like, denying and even criminalizing science, and abusing the public trust for personal gain while at the same time espousing empty promises about helping the less fortunate for most/all of recorded history.

Modern Conservatives are simply the continuation of not-so-modern Conservatives.
2014-02-11 11:26:16 AM
1 votes:

A Cave Geek: Definitely. I guess from what I see, and I'd be interested on your take on this too, is that conservatives value those 'hero' types who fight epic battles, and prevail against all odds over those who work 'behind the scenes' to change things in slower, more subtle ways, without 'tearing the whole thing down'. Liberals tend to favor those who work behind the scenes over the 'guts and glory' hero types.


If you buy into it, the whole RWA-thing supports that hypothesis (I think Jackson Herring is the Farxpert on that, though) - that American Conservatism tends to be more of a demagogic organization (viz. the continued and active fawning over Reagan, whose presidency ended just a short quarter-century ago, and his life a decade ago).

Me, I think it comes from the (again, broad-stroked) levels of education and desire for outside sources. Liberals tend to be higher-educated, and in critical-thinking fields (like philosophy or literature, both of which demand good arguing skills); suggesting that they (we) are more likely to pull apart an argument and try and support/attack it from every angle than to simply accept it because the source is trustworthy.

Confirmation bias and appeals to authority exist independent of politics, though.
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-02-11 10:59:54 AM
1 votes:
Except for the Those are really the things that define the redneck mentality.  The lack of them I mean.

That's why I think that this culture war thing isn't going to go away any time soon.  That mentality is simply not compatible with the idea of coexisting with people who aren't like you.

I think that "real Americans" comment that people laughed at Sarah Palin was a perfectly reasonable comment to the Southern/rural conservatives.  I live in the South and grew up here and many people really do believe that the USA was originally composed of people like them for people like them.

Non-whites and liberals are people who slipped in while immigration laws were lax and managed to somehow become technically US citizens, but they aren't real Americans, they just snuck in.

I don't think the tradition of country over party will ever come back.
2014-02-11 10:55:46 AM
1 votes:

A Cave Geek: Oh, goodie, another 'liberal vs conservative' thread.

Look, philosophically, reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.


Yes, that eternal struggle between "right-wing capitalist imperialism" and "right-wing capitalist imperialism with rape wands". The truth must be somewhere between those two.
2014-02-11 10:46:57 AM
1 votes:

A Cave Geek: Liberals tend to like using tact and diplomacy to avoid offending anyone, using violence only as an absolute last resort. While this often gets them in trouble, they would prefer it if the whole world could be our friend, as opposed to our enemy. Conservatives, by contrast view violence as a perfectly valid 'negotiating' tactic.


And yet, one of the refrains I hear from the more objectivist Republicans is that the government has a monopoly on state violence, and that this is a bad thing.

I don't know if This Means Something, but the focus on violence as the "prime mover" of economy, diplomacy, etc, is kind of revealing.
2014-02-11 10:24:13 AM
1 votes:

RminusQ: Serious Black: hubiestubert: 1) Tolerance
2) Compassion
3) Being nicer
4) Self esteem
5) Diversity

Yeah, these are destroying EVERYTHING...

Really? That's the list? How are any of those things even remotely bad to exhibit?

Now, I can see how in principle, while none of these things are bad, they could be less good in massive doses. For instance, self-esteem is one thing, egotism is taking it too far.

The fact that a suggestion of "tone down the egotism" is coming from a party whose attitude towards America itself is "AMERICA FIRST, FARK THE REST", well that's what you expect from fartbloggers.


Yeah, it's pretty haughty to suggest that more liberal-minded Americans have more excesses in self-esteem than conservative-minded Americans.
2014-02-11 10:12:37 AM
1 votes:
tolerance
compassion
feeding the hungry
clothing the needy
sheltering the homeless
2014-02-11 09:49:12 AM
1 votes:
Oh, goodie, another 'liberal vs conservative' thread.

Look, philosophically, reality is somewhere in between the two extremes.  At the moment, it's closer to the liberal view of the world, but that's not to say that the conservative philosophy is completely without merit.  (Their current implementation of that philosophy is another matter)

Basic virtues That both parties agree are valid and good for society in general: (In varying degrees)
- Generosity
- Hard work
- Responsibility
- Creativity
- Courage
- Freedom
- Integrity
- Honor
- Honesty
- Respect
- Kindness

Now, where things get really messy is when you start rating those virtues. While the GOP values generosity, conservatives don't value generosity as highly as they value freedom or responsibility.  Liberals tend to value kindness and generosity more highly than blunt force 'honesty'.

From what I've seen of the GOP, their top virtues that are valued above all others are Freedom, Honor, and Hard work.  All other virtues are relegated to a 'if we have time for them'.  From what I've seen of the liberals, their top three are:  Kindness, generosity, and Creativity.  Most others appear to be an 'if we have time for them'.

Like I said earlier, however, I think the 'perfect balance' of these virtues is much closer to the liberal view than the conservative one.
2014-02-11 09:47:40 AM
1 votes:

Mjeck: I once had a Catholic tell me he didn't want to his tax dollars going towards prolapsed anuses


Then maybe his church should stop raping choir boys in the rectory.
2014-02-11 09:41:50 AM
1 votes:

hubiestubert: 1) Tolerance
2) Compassion
3) Being nicer
4) Self esteem
5) Diversity

Yeah, these are destroying EVERYTHING...


Really? That's the list? How are any of those things even remotely bad to exhibit?
2014-02-11 09:38:34 AM
1 votes:

Gonz: somedude210: Caring about their fellow man?

Pretty much, yeah.

The older I get, the more I realize that, to be a capital-C Conservative in 2014, you need to be some combination of mean, angry, ignorant, and scared. And that's got to be a horrible way to live every day. It really makes me feel sorry for them, in a way. Which, I guess, is a very liberal thing to say.


Mostly scared.  Questioning anything scares the piss out of them.  Not to mention reality.  Reality is the most frightening thing of all.
2014-02-11 09:37:56 AM
1 votes:

kidgenius: What's the "harmful government program with the pleasant-sounding name"?


Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, the EPA, the ACA, and basically anything not connected with the military. Because helping the needy and protecting the environment don't give you as good a hard-on as blowing stuff up.
2014-02-11 09:13:36 AM
1 votes:
Five Pastries I Haven't Yet Ingested Rectally by John Hawkins
2014-02-11 09:06:23 AM
1 votes:
Diversity is a strength? Tell that to Afghanistan or Iraq.

Holy crap, The US is about a million times more diverse. Dumbass doesn't realize that the only "diversity" in places like Iraq and Afghanistan is the specific flavor of the same farking religion that they ALL follow. It would be like if the US was only Protestants and Methodists, or something.
2014-02-11 09:05:38 AM
1 votes:

vpb: 1derful: clambam: Once again, the underlying complaint is that white people are on the verge of ceasing to be the majority in this country. Cry some more.

They left out virtue 6, the hope for the extermination of a whole race of people.

I have met a lot of people who literally think we should wipe out the "Arabs" with nuclear weapons.  It's not an uncommon sentiment.


Let me guess, they say that it's due to terrorism? Because nothing else quite tells me that someone really hates terrorism than when they advocate blowing up innocent civilians in their target country.
2014-02-11 09:03:53 AM
1 votes:

HeartBurnKid: 1derful: clambam: Once again, the underlying complaint is that white people are on the verge of ceasing to be the majority in this country. Cry some more.

They left out virtue 6, the hope for the extermination of a whole race of people.

Really?  This is what you're going with?  "Liberals want to kill all white people?"


Sure he is.  I'm a White guy doing my part by marrying an Asian women and having FOUR MIXED RACE BABIES!  Wha Ha Ha! The extermination by interbreeding has begun!

Someone else post the Wonka pic, please
2014-02-11 08:59:43 AM
1 votes:

1derful: clambam: Once again, the underlying complaint is that white people are on the verge of ceasing to be the majority in this country. Cry some more.

They left out virtue 6, the hope for the extermination of a whole race of people.


Really?  This is what you're going with?  "Liberals want to kill all white people?"
2014-02-11 08:52:14 AM
1 votes:

gnosis301: Ah, it's pajama guy.


Our fartblogging friend has already farted out something dumber than his "misquote" of Scott Walker? Impressive(ly pathetic)
2014-02-11 08:48:31 AM
1 votes:
images.sodahead.com
2014-02-11 08:45:56 AM
1 votes:
4 nouns conservatives can't define, and the phrase "being nice"
2014-02-11 08:44:31 AM
1 votes:
Townhall links...
static2.wikia.nocookie.net
2014-02-11 08:37:39 AM
1 votes:
Ah, it's pajama guy.
2014-02-11 08:37:00 AM
1 votes:
Is this another one of those moronic "lists" written by that overweight lying shiatstain John Hawkins?

*hovers mouse*

YUP.
2014-02-11 08:35:38 AM
1 votes:
1) The way they eat those crackers.
2) They're near.
3) Well?! Just  look at them! You know they're up to no good!
4) Is it past 6:30? I need to go to bed.
5) I soiled myself again.
2014-02-11 08:34:35 AM
1 votes:
Compassion and being nice are taken to the extreme by liberals?

It would take a truly heinous person to point out someone else is being too compassionate.
2014-02-11 08:28:42 AM
1 votes:
Written by a man who appears to have never taken self-moderation to the extreme by the looks of things.
2014-02-11 08:26:15 AM
1 votes:
6) Rocking a mic like a vandal.
2014-02-11 08:23:06 AM
1 votes:
Being nice? Whatever other "virtues" they may have, "nice" isn't one I'd choose.

J 🐟
2014-02-11 08:04:12 AM
1 votes:
Caring about their fellow man?
 
Displayed 56 of 56 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report