Everyday is an education......

Status
Not open for further replies.

poadeleted1

Deleted by request
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Messages
652
Not trolling. I thought this is an interesting commentary from LA. Maybe not and the MC will delete it. I hope not, because I would like to try to understand the mentality - and which "side" has the defect?
Anyway........

Here are three questions comparing liberals and conservatives:

1. During the 2004 elections, which car was more likely to be "keyed," i.e., deliberately scratched -- a car with a "John Kerry" bumper sticker in an overwhelmingly conservative area, or a car with a "George W. Bush" sticker in an overwhelmingly liberal area?

2. When speaking at colleges, do right-wing or left-wing speakers need and receive police protection?

3. In a debate between a right-wing and a left-wing speaker before an audience equally divided between left and right, which audience group is more likely to boo and hiss at the speaker with whom it disagrees -- the liberal or the conservative?


Here are the answers:

1. Where I live in liberal Los Angeles, drivers of most vehicles with Bush-Cheney bumper stickers have told me (and I have often seen) that their cars (and mine) were deliberately scratched. When I have asked about the fate of cars with Kerry-Edwards stickers in equally conservative areas in, for example, Orange County or even the Bible Belt, no Democrat has reported such intentional damage to his car. This does not mean it never happens, only that it is far more rare. I would bet a lot of money -- and I am not a gambler -- that cars displaying conservative messages in liberal areas are far more likely to be defaced than cars with liberal messages in conservative areas. (Granted it could be that the writer does not have a large circle of Democrat friends, so not much data - KP)

2. When Ann Coulter goes to college campuses, she is accompanied by a bodyguard. And colleges routinely bring in police to protect her and to guard against student violence. No bodyguard or police contingent is necessary for Al Franken. Another leftist, Noam Chomsky, a man who has devoted his life to attacking America, goes from campus to campus without worrying about having so much as a pie thrown at him, something regularly done to conservative David Horowitz.

3. Whenever I have debated representatives of the Left before politically mixed audiences, I have been hissed and booed far more than my opponent was. Others who debate leftists report identical experiences. Why? Because in general, conservative members of the audience are more civil and less angry.

There are a few reasons for this discrepancy. One is that the more left one goes, the more one is likely to encounter people who substitute "social justice" for personal morality. Another is that in the eyes of most leftists, people who oppose their "progressive" views on the environment, the war and taxes are such morally inferior people that they are not owed decent behavior.

But the biggest reason is the most obvious one: Liberals hate conservatives far more than conservatives hate liberals.
 
I think there's truth to that KP -- the liberal left is truly ****ed off (and angry too!). I don't know why they are so strident, but they are. I would have to say they're radical, and maybe not very rational. Go figure...
 
RotaryWingBob said:
I think there's truth to that KP -- the liberal left is truly ****ed off (and angry too!). I don't know why they are so strident, but they are. I would have to say they're radical, and maybe not very rational. Go figure...

The WHY is the big question. If they let the system work, and they do have better ideas, not just complaints, they could find themselves on top again. But instead, they rant and scream and do generally irrational things that make ordinary people say "Do we really want them in charge?"
 
Based on what I've seen on the Internet and on the TV news shows, and heard on talk radio, and in the newspapers (not to mention a certain forum now extinct), I strongly disagree with the last sentence of the commentary.
 
There was a great deal of election violence in the last campaign directed against conservatives from liberals. Rarely received widespread reporting, though. I wonder why?
 
Having watched a little FOX news, I'd say that there's plenty of incivility to go around. On both sides.
 
MSmith said:
Having watched a little FOX news, I'd say that there's plenty of incivility to go around. On both sides.

That's a nice way of avoiding the facts, I suppose. You know of anyone on Fox News, or any other conservatives, beating up a nine year old girl for holding a John Kerry sign? Liberals did just that to a little girl for holding a George Bush sign. Lots of other examples. Saying "well, they do it to" is not only irrelevant, it's not true. The left has resorted to widespread violence to undermine our democratic system, that is surely going to generate some unfriendly commentary.

BTW, have you watched much CNN? Would you say the blatant hostility directed toward the right is "civil?"
 
liberals spend their days booing, hissing, and scratching cars
conservatives spend their days posting anti liberal stuff on web boards
im going to go back to work
 
Joe Williams said:
That's a nice way of avoiding the facts, I suppose. You know of anyone on Fox News, or any other conservatives, beating up a nine year old girl for holding a John Kerry sign? Liberals did just that to a little girl for holding a George Bush sign.

Do you have a link for this ? I looked for about 20 minutes, and couldn't find a single page with this story.
 
MSmith said:
Having watched a little FOX news, I'd say that there's plenty of incivility to go around. On both sides.

What? :dunno:
 
Last edited:
SJP said:
Do you have a link for this ? I looked for about 20 minutes, and couldn't find a single page with this story.

Most I've got for you at work is a link to what the local union president, whose members attacked the little girl had to say about the incident. Other links are on my home computer. Seems the Yahoo stories have expired, and I don't have time to look further.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1219004/posts
 
RotaryWingBob said:
I think there's truth to that KP -- the liberal left is truly ****ed off (and angry too!). I don't know why they are so strident, but they are. I would have to say they're radical, and maybe not very rational. Go figure...

Good point about "radical-ness". Radical behaviour is the antithesis fo conservatism. Liberalism is by definition openess to change. Thus, liberals are open to behavior that overthrows a status quo.

Liberalism also has more appeal to the young, who tend, as a group, to be more angry and destructive. Goes back to the saw regarding age:

"If you're under 25 and not a liberal, you have no heart. If you're over 25 and not a Conservative, you have no brain."
 
Last edited:
Dart said:
Liberalism is by definition openess to change. Thus, liberals are open to behavior that overthrows a status quo.


Oh really? I would call the "demonstrators" in France radical liberals and they don't want anything to change, especially the socialist progams and rules that are killing their economy.

And how about the people that don't want affirmative action and our socila programs to change. They want status quo and they are the embodiment of liberals.
 
Joe Williams said:
BTW, have you watched much CNN? Would you say the blatant hostility directed toward the right is "civil?"

Yes.

I think you are confusing "civil" with "agrees with me". It is entirely possible to hold a civil discussion without agreeing. Witness the religion thread on this site.

I believe that CNN does a better job of not directly insulting a person in their coverage. They do take exception to the person's position. I believe that the conservative media throw around terms like "moonbat" and "wackjob" more than the liberal media.

There's a difference between attacking the person and attacking the person's idea.
 
Joe Williams said:
Most I've got for you at work is a link to what the local union president, whose members attacked the little girl had to say about the incident. Other links are on my home computer. Seems the Yahoo stories have expired, and I don't have time to look further.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1219004/posts



http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040917-010155-8041r.htm
http://mediamatters.org/items/200409170013
http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/2004/09/bogus-assault-father-freeper-of-year.html

Spin is a wonderful thing... :D
 
MSmith said:
I believe that the conservative media throw around terms like "moonbat" and "wackjob" more than the liberal media.

Although not necessarily the media, but many liberals are quite adept at using slurs like "nazi" and "racist" on a rather frequent basis.

MSmith said:
There's a difference between attacking the person and attacking the person's idea.
Totally agree.
 
SJP said:

Spin? I reckon it depends on how you look at it. You posted one link that reported the attack, another that appeared to me to defend the attack on a little girl, and the other I can't open at work.

There were a number of liberal sites at the time that defended attacking that little girl. They said her Dad was a political acitivist, and she got what she deserved. Her Dad IS a political activist. IOW, he exercised his right and duty to peacefully speak out and express his views. Apparently, some liberals view that as justification for attacking a man's children. His daughter was doing the same thing, as is her right as an American. Apparently, some liberals view that as justification for attacking her, no matter her age. Any person who holds that there is any excuse, any justification for attacking any person, much less a little girl, because they do not like the campaign sign that person is holding is ragingly anti-American, and those who seek to excuse attacking children for any reason are mentally and morally unbalanced, IMHO.

There is NO EXCUSE for assaulting others for peacefully expressing their views. Election violence goes against all this country stands for, yet an increasing number of those on the left commit it, and others support them for doing so. IMHO, those in that second link you posted and others who agree with them are declared enemies of our Constitution, quite aside from being cowards and bullies. They attack children or support such actions. There is no difference, in my mind, between them and those who attacked us on 9/11. Terrorists, pure and simple.

I note that the Union president, who surely does not agree with that little girl or her dad, doesn't seem terribly impressed with the actions of his own people.
 
Anthony said:
Oh really?

Yep.

Anthony said:
I would call the "demonstrators" in France radical liberals

Me too.

Anthony said:
and they don't want anything to change, especially the socialist progams and rules that are killing their economy.

By my view "socialism" is a radical liberal concept. So by demonstrating to maintain socialism they are trying to change the natural status quo, ie: the concept of personal responsibility.

Anthony said:
And how about the people that don't want affirmative action and our socila programs to change. They want status quo and they are the embodiment of liberals.

Yep, they are indeed.
 
Last edited:
My wifes car was keyed (scratched) from trunk all the way to the front of the hood... nothing on the car but a "W" sticker on the back.
 
Dart said:
By my view "socialism" is a radical liberal concept. So by demonstrating to maintain socialism they are trying to change the natural status quo, ie: the concept of personal responsibility.


How long does something have to be around to be the status quo? Would Communism in the former Soviet Union be considered the status quo? Would modern religions, while the status quo now were not around for most of the history of humanity. Sorry Dart, I don't see it.
 
ednowlin said:
My wifes car was keyed (scratched) from trunk all the way to the front of the hood... nothing on the car but a "W" sticker on the back.

My mustang got gouged all the way down the side. Only sticker was a Thinkgeek "Go away or I will replace you with a small shell script". Causal link cannot be established.
 
Anthony said:
Dart said:
By my view "socialism" is a radical liberal concept. So by demonstrating to maintain socialism they are trying to change the natural status quo, ie: the concept of personal responsibility.
How long does something have to be around to be the status quo? Would Communism in the former Soviet Union be considered the status quo? Would modern religions, while the status quo now were not around for most of the history of humanity. Sorry Dart, I don't see it.

Actually, the predecessor to socialism is feudalism. No personal responsibility there - it's responsibility of the lord to the serfs and the serfs to the lord.
 
tonycondon said:
liberals spend their days booing, hissing, and scratching cars
conservatives spend their days posting anti liberal stuff on web boards
im going to go back to work[/quote


I would guess the "data" as presented by the media is slanted. I've seen nastiness on both sides (even the side that won) but the vast majority of people I know do not display political bumper stickers of any kind. And plenty of cars get keyed anyway!
 
I'm not sure what the point of this is. Liberals are worse because a few more of them are destructive than conservatives? We're right because you have a few more A-holes than we do? Your evidence of this is weak at best. And even if it were true, we would probably be talking like 3% vs. 5%. WAG. Big deal. Both sides are composed mostly of honest, hard working people who just want what's best for this country. You claim to be not trolling, but I think that this was exactly that. What possible useful discussion could come from it?
 
wbarnhill said:
My mustang got gouged all the way down the side. Only sticker was a Thinkgeek "Go away or I will replace you with a small shell script". Causal link cannot be established.

Maybe it was just because it your car?:D :D :D
 
jkaduk said:
I'm not sure what the point of this is. Liberals are worse because a few more of them are destructive than conservatives? We're right because you have a few more A-holes than we do? Your evidence of this is weak at best. And even if it were true, we would probably be talking like 3% vs. 5%. WAG. Big deal. Both sides are composed mostly of honest, hard working people who just want what's best for this country. You claim to be not trolling, but I think that this was exactly that. What possible useful discussion could come from it?

Well John, it made you think to come up with some numbers and thoughts. Useful? I don't know. Consider it my contribution to your battle against Altzheimers - exercising your brain.
 
F.W. Birdman said:
1. During the 2004 elections, which car was more likely to be "keyed," i.e., deliberately scratched -- a car with a "John Kerry" bumper sticker in an overwhelmingly conservative area, or a car with a "George W. Bush" sticker in an overwhelmingly liberal area?

Do you have any real statistics from a real source for ANY of these? No?

I know that my parents, living in a very liberal area, had their John Kerry lawn signs torn down and defaced repeatedly, until they hung it from the outer branches of a tree, 20+ feet in the air. (Apparently squirrels are liberals, they didn't touch it. ;))

But the biggest reason is the most obvious one: Liberals hate conservatives far more than conservatives hate liberals.

I get way more crap for being a "liberal" (I'm really moderate, thank you, but there seem to be many more conservatives on pilot boards and thus I'm branded a "lib") than I have ever dished out. Billboards in Chicago advertise a conservative talk show with big letters that say "LIBERALS HATE IT!"

It also seems that conservatives tend to paint with a broad brush sometimes, making sweeping generalizations about liberals. (The irony of the previous sentence has not escaped me. :rolleyes:) I hear a lot of hate spewed about "liberals" but generally the liberals don't hate all conservatives... Just certain ones. For instance, I can't stand W, but I'd have voted for McCain in a heartbeat. I really like Sen. Russ Feingold (D), but when Herb Kohl (D) comes up for re-election, I'll be giving his opponent some serious consideration, and a vote too as long as it's someone half-competent (read: not any of the folks the Republicans put up against Feingold in 04!)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Do you have any real statistics from a real source for ANY of these? No?

I know that my parents, living in a very liberal area, had their John Kerry lawn signs torn down and defaced repeatedly, until they hung it from the outer branches of a tree, 20+ feet in the air. (Apparently squirrels are liberals, they didn't touch it. ;))



I get way more crap for being a "liberal" (I'm really moderate, thank you, but there seem to be many more conservatives on pilot boards and thus I'm branded a "lib") than I have ever dished out. Billboards in Chicago advertise a conservative talk show with big letters that say "LIBERALS HATE IT!"

It also seems that conservatives tend to paint with a broad brush sometimes, making sweeping generalizations about liberals. (The irony of the previous sentence has not escaped me. :rolleyes:) I hear a lot of hate spewed about "liberals" but generally the liberals don't hate all conservatives... Just certain ones. For instance, I can't stand W, but I'd have voted for McCain in a heartbeat. I really like Sen. Russ Feingold (D), but when Herb Kohl (D) comes up for re-election, I'll be giving his opponent some serious consideration, and a vote too as long as it's someone half-competent (read: not any of the folks the Republicans put up against Feingold in 04!)

Kent - first - the opinion was opinion. Just like liberals, conservatives have opinions too. And don't it just get your panties in a wad that they are free to express themselves, just like you.

As for the billboard - do you contend that liberals love it or what? Does it irritate you that someone is capatalizing on their perception that liberals are less than enamored with that person? Who knows, the guys who put the billboard up might have been liberals who were working as a result.

I assume you know all liberals, or a significant number of them to make the pronouncement that they don't hate conservatives. OK, I will give you that, but it sure is sad that "liberals" who claim to be all about equal rights, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, etc. are the ones who shout down the President, "conservative" speakers, rail about the conservative press to the point of calling for it to be shut down or censored, and on and on.....

I sense that people are getting just a bit tighter than they need to be in this thread, so I am asking it to be locked. No sense in making people expose themselves.....it was a nice exercise while it lasted. Both sides egged the other on though and in the end, no one changed their minds and no one understands anyone any better.
 
I think the above discussion pretty much proves 2 things to me.
1. The minority fringe of any group can pretty much screw things up for everyone
2. Labels will unfairly categorize folks
 
wbarnhill said:
My mustang got gouged all the way down the side. Only sticker was a Thinkgeek "Go away or I will replace you with a small shell script". Causal link cannot be established.

I really doubt that there's any valid data linking car keying to political stickers. I know it makes for a good story and maybe good talk radio but cars were getting keyed long before this last election.
 
The only sticker (other than a Wisconsin State Park Sticker) on my car is an AOPA sticker. I have never been keyed. My wife's car has absolutly no stickers on it and she has been keyed three times. Probably has more to do with her working in contact with the public and having to enforce codes of behavior in a public establishment. Does worry me that nut jobs may have figured out what she is driving.
 
smigaldi said:
My wife's car has absolutly no stickers on it and she has been keyed three times. Probably has more to do with her working in contact with the public and having to enforce codes of behavior in a public establishment. Does worry me that nut jobs may have figured out what she is driving.

That's exactly why you won't find any LE related stickers or vanity plates on my car. I have stickers, but not anything work related or political. No keying incidents so far **knocking on wood**
 
F.W. Birdman said:
Kent - first - the opinion was opinion. Just like liberals, conservatives have opinions too. And don't it just get your panties in a wad that they are free to express themselves, just like you.

Whose panties are in a wad? :dunno:

As for the billboard - do you contend that liberals love it or what?

No, just that it's encouraging the hate that seems to be springing forth from conservatives for the past few years. Many of these same folks have bumper stickers and such that say "United we stand." I don't think they understand the meaning. (Way too many people from BOTH sides don't get that one.)

are the ones who shout down the President, "conservative" speakers, rail about the conservative press

Thus exercising said rights...

to the point of calling for it to be shut down or censored, and on and on.....

I have never heard anyone calling for "conservative media" to be shut down or censored (or liberal media for that matter). In fact, I'm not sure if I've ever heard anyone utter the term "conservative media." You have Fox News which is "Fair and balanced" :rofl: and everyone else is the "liberal media" from what I can tell.

I sense that people are getting just a bit tighter than they need to be in this thread, so I am asking it to be locked. No sense in making people expose themselves.....it was a nice exercise while it lasted. Both sides egged the other on though and in the end, no one changed their minds and no one understands anyone any better.

It's been more civil than several other recent threads, and the outcome of all of them has been exactly the same.
 
Well, I was taking a time out, but I thought I'd focus back on the original commentary.

There are a few reasons for this discrepancy. One is that the more left one goes, the more one is likely to encounter people who substitute "social justice" for personal morality. Another is that in the eyes of most leftists, people who oppose their "progressive" views on the environment, the war and taxes are such morally inferior people that they are not owed decent behavior.

It is interesting that the commentator (whoever that was, it wasn't sourced) points his fingers at liberals as hatemongers, and then he proceeds to throw hateful stones. A example is above, he is using a 4 inch paintbrush when he decides that most liberals rely on something other than personal morality, when the fact is that our personal morality is simply defined differently than his - in other words social justice IS personal morality.

The rest is just a bunch of hooey. If Al Franken went in front of an audience of republican idealists in whatever hotbed venue they populate these days I'm sure he'd get a few pies. But he doesn't. Most campuses are a bastion of liberals...so what else is new :dunno:
 
Last edited:
F.W. Birdman said:
Both sides egged the other on though and in the end, no one changed their minds and no one understands anyone any better.
Same as every other political thread I've seen...
 
F.W. Birdman said:
I sense that people are getting just a bit tighter than they need to be in this thread, so I am asking it to be locked. No sense in making people expose themselves.....it was a nice exercise while it lasted. Both sides egged the other on though and in the end, no one changed their minds and no one understands anyone any better.

So why did YOU start the thread?

What did you hope to accomplish other than stirring everybody up?
 
MSmith said:
So why did YOU start the thread?

What did you hope to accomplish other than stirring everybody up?

Do you have something meaningful to contribute, or do you just like throwing stones? If it's the first, then speak your piece. If it's the second, *PFFFFFFFT*. It's a free country. No one makes you read the thread, do they?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top