REAL SHAMAN: Is this really what the mainstream democrats think got bush elected?

Let's break that down, shall we?

"All those evangelical-right-wing-Christian-overweight-fools in their mega-church-garbage-TV realities?"

Evangelical? They've been making a lot of noise about how people have to be Christian, so yeah, that fits.

Right-wing? But of course. They're voting republican.

Christian? See the first point.

Overweight? How many studies have come out recently stating that Americans as a whole are overweight?

Fools? Probably a matter of personal opinion, but usually, those who hold different opinions than the speaker are considered by said speaker to be fools...

Mega-Church? I don't know about that one. Don't know any numbers. But they sound pretty large.

Garbage-TV? I don't know about this either, as I haven't watched more than three hours of TV this year.

So that's probably how most people who didn't vote for Bush would view him, yeah.

openfry: Typical liberal though...

Did you know the US is officially categorized as a "Liberal Democracy"?

Must rankle you horribly, if labels mean that much to you.

openfry: Actually it's a representative democracy, or a republic. But nice try with the fake facts liberal. Stop reading that little red book and pick up a history book sometime.

The two are not mutually exclusive:


Liberal democracy is a form of government. It is a representative democracy where the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a constitution which emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities.

Lessee: Representative democracy? Check. Constitution? Check. Protection of rights and freedoms, via the bill of rights? Check.

Yep. We're a Liberal Democracy alright.

Don't be blinded by your own dogma. Don't be blinded by labels.

Otherwise, you'll look really funny.

openfry: See... liberals make shiat up. Lol.

Hey, I'm just quoting the definition. I didn't make it up.

Sorry that reality has a "liberal bias" in your eyes.

openfry: more like farkality commie.

Eh?

See, now you're not even making sense.

Note, by the way, that I don't even count as a 'liberal', much less a communist.

I also appear to have a far better grasp on the English language than you do--are you, perhaps, getting drunk?

Quick1: Your problem is that you looked it up in a book. Obviously, openfry here looks his facts up in his gut.

Ohhhh, I see.

You don't want to know what my gut is telling me, quite frankly. Let's just say there was too much coffee yesterday, and leave it at that.

openfry: See the problem is liberals have tried over the years to redefine what a republic is...

A vast conspiracy indeed. From the same wiki article:

Liberal democracy traces its origins - and its name - to the European 18th century, also known as the Age of Enlightenment.

Back as far as the 1700's! Back to the time of the very founding of this country!

Mr. Clarence Butterworth: The US is a Representative Republic with a written constitution, lamebrains.

Sheesh.

Which is the same thing as a liberal democracy.

Honestly, you folk with the labels....why get so uptight what something's called?

A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet.

openfry: Not only that the name itself is misleading and not based on any valid etymology.

Not at all. It's perfectly descriptive of a democracy that has a constitution to protect liberties.

Ranting and raving's not going to change it, y'know, and it's just going to make you look foolish, especially with your inability to spell "seriously"...

Just goes to prove my point, though: people are far too concerned with labels to even look at the thing that the label is placed on. This "liberal" label is what gives you, for instance, the 2nd amendment--is that so evil? Are the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness a bad thing?

Don't judge a book by its cover, and all that jazz.

/And the same thing may--perfectly validly!--be called by many different names depending on who's looking at it.

The CraneMeister: For someone who has gone so far out of his way to carefully define his terms, it's interesting that you fail to realize the word "liberal" could mean radically different things in radically different contexts.

The word "liberal" in the term "liberal democracy" does not mean the same thing it does in, say, the terms "liberal blue-stater" or "voting liberal."

That was purposeful, to ruffle his feathers and get him to react foolishly. The point of the exercise is to make him look over his reactionary attitude--how anything labelled "liberal" is evil--and think critically about his beliefs.

Way to blow my cover. ;-þ

The CraneMeister: Here we go again.

*cough*

"2006-09-13 11:05:00 AM"