Although I sincerely hope she does, I fear she will not even thoroughly read it. Most people, when confronted with foreign ideas, or ideas that run contrary to the ones they have clung to, are unable to objectively consider the ideas without simply dismissing them.
As you read my comments below, I hope you'll read them as if you know nothing on the subject, and evaluate the ideas objectively, before applying your personal biases to them.
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be very liberal, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth. She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his. One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school. Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying. Her father listened and then asked, “How is your friend Audrey doing?” She replied, “Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over.” Her wise father asked his daughter, “Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 20.. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.” The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, “That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!” The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, “Welcome to the conservative side of the fence.”
If anyone has a better explanation of the difference between conservative and liberal or progressive or neocon I'm all ears. If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.A liberal will delete it because he's "offended."
Conservatives claim to want a limited government, but it's a lie. Their idea of a limited government is one who is unable to regulate businesses, but one that also strictly regulates the morality and lifestyle choices of individual citizens.
Conservatives wont allow responsible EPA regulations to protect our enviornment from the excesses and abuses of big businesses, they wont allow torts to be used to keep big businesses from abusing people and the environment, hell they don't even want big businesses to have to pay any taxes.
I wouldn't call them conservatives at all... I'd call them agents of multinational corportations... Or Corporationists for short. More precisely, Corporationist Conservatives....
Right now, as I type this, Corporationists threaten to fillibuster legislation extending unemployment benefits for the middle class, legislation to pass a budget (that's extremely late, once again), and legislation to restore equal civil liberties to an entire class of Americans serving in our military, as well as tax cuts for middle class Americans.
It is the "conservative" states that prohibited inter-racial marriage. And I'm not talking about the civil war period, I'm talking about during my parents lifetime. People who are still alive today were forced to sit in the back of the bus, or only drink from certain water fountains, and as recently as 1967, prohibited from marrying the person of their choice because of their race (or even perceived race). Although invalidated by the Supreme Court, laws prohibiting inter-racial marriage were still on the books as recently as 9 years ago.
Now that it's become "uncool" to be a racist pig, the corporationists (those folks that like to call themselves coservatives) have turned their attention toward social discrimination instead of racial discrimination. Instead of fighting to prohibit inter racial marriage, they are fighting to prevent other groups of people from getting married. Although this time the details of their discrimination is different, everything else about it is still the same.
In Texas, the de facto headquarters of corporationist conservativism, it was a crime for a man to have sex with another man until just a few years ago when the supreme court was forced to intervene. Can you believe that? A crime to have sex with a consenting adult in the privacy of your own home... How's that for limited government?
In the military, although Lawrence v. Texas overturned military law making it a crime to have gay sex, it's currently illegal to be "out" as a gay person in the military, and gays who come out are subject to being immediately discharged. What that means is that the law forces military service members who happen to be gay to daily make material misrepresentations about theirselves and how they spend their off duty time. To hell with military core values and what the military PME teaches about honor, honesty, and loyalty. All that gets thrown out the window when it's convenient for military leaders, especially if you happen to be gay.
In this part of my narrative, you might be asking yourself why a guy such as myself (a biker who is happily married to a woman, who has never had any desire for a gay relationship or gay sexual experience) gives a shit about the plight of gays... The answer is pretty simple... I believe when I fail to stand up for the civil liberties of my neighbor, I begin to forfeit my own.
I am one of the few remaining true conservatives. I don't have to want to ride my motorcycle without a helmet to despise helmet laws, or to drive around without my seatbelt to hate seatbelt laws, and I don't have to want to suck some guys dick in order to hate sodomy laws and the prohibition of gay marriage.
Unlike the GOP, who I refer to as corporatist conservatives because they are completely bought and paid for by large multi national corporations, pharmacological companies, insurance companies, and large banks/banking special interests, I can wish for a small, limited government without hating having any government. I can wish for low taxes without opposing all taxes, and I can wish for the 2nd amendment to be honored and properly enforced/protected without threatening to violently overthrow the government if an election doesn't go my way. (References: Stephen Broden, Joyce Kaufman, Sharon Angle)
Those who call themselves conservatives lately seem to like to create a straw man argument that lumps everyone they consider a liberal into one group and attach certain ideas to that group and argue those ideas. Infact, few people in that group of liberals would agree on more than a couple of the positions assigned to that group, much less all of them.
I refuse to argue straw men. If you want to discuss politics with me, grow some balls, step out of the herd, develop some independent ideas, and lets discuss/debate them. As long as you're unwilling/unable to do anything other throw Glenn Beck quotes around, I don't have any time to discuss anything with you. Once you're capable of taking a couple of independent thoughts and string them together into a reasonable, logical argument, I'd love to discuss it with you.
Just to illustrate what I mean when I saw they use a straw man to advance their arguments, I'll respond point by point to her little test of conservatism and point out the obvious flaws.
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
It's true, most people who push for unreasonable gun control are politically liberal, but that hardly means "liberals want all guns outlawed." In fact, while my friends who consider themselves conservative would swear I'm a card carrying liberal, I not only support firearm ownership, but I own firearms myself. I'm a hunter, and I believe citizens who don't suffer from mental health problems, aren't the subject of a restraining order, and have never been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving violence should be allowed to carry a firearm, open or concealed, almost anywhere they go without any kind of special permit. I also believe in the "Make my Day law" in Colorado, and wish we had a similar law in here in the Golden State. How's that for liberal??
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
Again, another ridiculous straw man argument. I know lots of liberals who eat meat, and several conservatives who don't. It's only a very small, very vocal group of liberals (including the idiots who call themselves PETA, and the celebs who support PETA) who advocate laws preventing the rest of us from eating meat. Hardly a group you can reasonably suggest represents the politics of all, or even most liberals.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
An absurd, baseless accusation. It would be accurate if you replaced the word liberal with "lazy person" and conservative with "motivated, resourceful person." Instead, the implication is that all liberals are lazy and all conservatives are motivated and resourceful. Patently false.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
A great example of how conservatives love to throw accusations around without providing any evidence or sources... Then when you press them for sources, they act offended and defensive. They love to suggest you take things they say "too literally" as if they didn't mean it they way you understood it... Try pressing them on how they did mean it and watch them explain it in a different way that totally matches the way you understood it to begin with.
This is a material misrepresentation of what non-believers want. Non believers (If I may be so forward as to speak for all of us) want one thing... We want the 1st amendment protection of the separation of church and state vigorously enforced. (examples: Pledge of Allegience, 10 Commandments in Council Chambers, Mojave Cross, etc)If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
Another cleverly constructed straw man argument. No one has suggested that YOU pay for MY healthcare. What has been suggested, is that the healthcare system is seriously broken. The main reason it's broken is because health care is largely provided by health insurance companies who make money by not paying for our healthcare. That's like suggesting you can keep your house clean by employing someone who profits by not cleaning. It doesn't make any sense at all.
Some people believe health care can only be effectively delivered if the government controls it instead of the health insurance industry controlling it, as it does now.
Another idea is to require health insurance companies be limited to "non profit organizations" (that happens to be my idea).
Regardless of what approach we take, it's obvious to everyone (except those who are bought and paid for by the insurance companies) that our current system is broken and does not work at all. It's absurd to believe you can receive good health care when your insurance company only makes a profit by denying as many claims as possible.
The suggestion that this boils down to people wanting everyone else to pay for their healthcare comes from the health insurance industry who doesn't want our system to change because they are making record profits from it, while Americans (like my family) go without necessary healthcare services because they can't afford them. The partisans push this garbage argument and the ignorant eat it up without giving it a second thought... Until it's their loved one who needs a medical treatment and can't get it because their health insurance company has dropped them because after paying premiums all these years, they suddenly have become too expensive to continue to insure....
You can take your conservative vs liberal test and shove it up your ass.... While you're doing that, the rest of us will discuss real ideas about how we can fix our country and continue to be the wealthiest, healthiest, happiest country in the world, like we used to be.
One thing I'd really like to know is how social conservatives (the Bill O and the Rush Limbaugh crowd) can claim they want a limited government, while pushing for legislation that regulates our marriages and our private bedroom activities. I suggest they are liars... Every last one of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment