PDA

View Full Version : Razorsharp vs. The Liberals


Gyrate
01-10-2004, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by Razorsharp
One of the things I love most about internet forums, is how easy it is to reveal the true character of the typical liberal.And thank God for people like Razorsharp to protect us from the evil liberal conspiracy to destroy freedom, democracy and America as it could be if only those nasty liberal types would stop their meddling. Let's see what else our fearless defender of the faith has to say:Let's examine one of liberalism's biggest smears.

Mention the term "hate-crime" to the average individual, and he or she will, almost without fail, have the mental image of a White persecuting a minority. That's what I mean by a "Through the Looking Glass" worldview. However, reality tells a different story.

FBI crime statistics reveal that minorities are several times more likely to commit a "hate-crime" against a White, than the commonly held misperception of minorities being the victims of "hate" perpetrated by Whites.

So, how do you suppose that such commonly held misconceptions occur, other than bordering on diliberate conspiracy?"So who are these liberals," I hear you ask, "and how can I identify them and thus uncover their nefarious scheme for world domination?"

Well fear no more, citizen, for here in easy-to-read form are some of the key attribute of liberals and their befuddled and corrupt thinking, as set out by Razorsharp in this thread here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=231155&perpage=50&pagenumber=1). I'm sure he won't mind me taking a few of his views about liberals out of context and using them to point out the danger that Western civilization is in from this dastardly scourge; indeed, it's a moral imperative that I do so. (And remember, folks, these are all from only one thread! Just imagine what other pearls of wisdom we could find with just a little searching!)People often wonder why liberals struggle in the arena of "talk radio". The answer is really quite simple.

Listening to the radio requires more intellectual exercise, than watching the "telescreen". With talk radio, just the words are provided, requiring the listener to translate the words into thoughts that are compatable with the listener's everyday life experiences.

Whereas, watching television requires little in intellectual exercise. The watcher is given the words, while the images of the "telescreen" guide the watcher's thoughts to the "correct" conclusions. Let's examine one of liberalism's pet causes, welfare.

With television, the words speak of the "needy", while images of those that truly are needy, reinforce the message . This does not work so well with radio. While the words may speak of the plight of the needy, it's not enough to erase the mental images of our everyday life experiences of the "single mom" crowding the checkout aisle with a shopping-cart full of "essentials" and a brood of young'uns, each bearing the telltale characteristics of a different father, as she carefully counts out the correct amount of foodstamps. Without the images to guide our thoughts, we start to question why we tolerate this.Speak it, brother! How dare they promote promiscuity in poor people!Remember, during the "D.C. sniping", the "authorities" brought in an "expert" to build a profile of who might be doing the shooting? And what did they come up with? Hollywood couldn't have done any better. It was a white redneck in a pickup truck. And because of this profiling, Muhammed and Malvo went to and fro without scrutiny to continue killing. Thank you, liberalism.See, according to the liberal ideology it's wrong to profile according to race, well, any race other than the white race.I'll rely on the theory of evolution that liberals are so fond of.The orthodoxy of liberalism is really comical. For instance, in the realm of religion, or rather, anti-religion, there is no creation, we evolved.

But, when pointing out differences between the races, groups, sub-species or whatever "invented" category, that can be attributed to evolution, liberals start wailing and stomping their feet, demanding that "we're all the same."It was nothing more than a rambling smokescreen to trumpet the liberal party-line of multiculturalism and diversity. But, wait a minute... wouldn't multiculturalism and diversity belie the liberal party-line that "we are all the same"? Hmmm.... Orwellian "double-think" comes to mind. Right: liberals are working towards the subversion of the white race -- got it.liberalism poses a danger to society.How so, O Speaker of Truth?Were they not so detrimental to traditional American society, liberals would be downright laughable at how they masquerade as honorable guardians of Constitutional integrity, while working diligently to subvert the very meaning of America's most sacred document in the construction of their "Through the Looking Glass" worldview.The answer is that the scourge known as "Political Correctness" that currently infects America, once known as the land of "freedom of speech", is nothing less than institutionalized "thought control" designed specifically to be applied to conservative Americans, who still embrace the traditional American values of individualism, freedom and liberty. Its purpose is to silence their protests of the socialization and globalization of the last genuinely free country that remains in the world today. But is it just liberals we should worry about?Liberals and neoconservatives alike promote an insane open-borders policy with such bromides as, "Diversity is America's greatest strength" or "Multiculturalism is the beautiful mosiac that is America".

Freedom and liberty are America's greatest strengths. Multiculturalism brings to America cultures that engage in such practices as female genital mutilation. Liberalism is a scourge that is dependent on the facist principle of big government, the antithesis of America's founding.The only way the double-standard can survive, is through the loyalty of a media that has prostituted itself to the point of becoming nothing more than an Orwellian "Ministry of Truth".Okay, so liberals, in league with neoconservatives, are in favor of diversity, fascism, and female genital mutilation. Check.

Anything else?It is such a transparently shallow tactic --- to create a strawman to knock down. A typically leftist tactic.Liberals are an odd lot, they will go into an absolute hissy-fit over any accurate portrayal that reveals the inherent degeneracy of their ideology, when name-calling and smearing is their forte.These liberals sound like fearsome folk. I hope I never encounter one.Oh boy, here we go again, having to deal with the liberal tactic of taking things out of context in a limp attempt to score a point. Uh-oh... :eek:

county
01-10-2004, 08:19 PM
LIBERAL
Pronunciation: 'liburul


Matching Terms: liberal arts, Liberal Party, liberalisation, liberalise, Liberalism, Liberalist, liberalistic, liberality, Liberalization, Liberalize, Liberalizer, Liberally, liberalness, liberate, liberated, liberating, liberation, Liberator, Liberatory


WordNet Dictionary

Definition: [n] a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties

Bryan Ekers
01-10-2004, 08:32 PM
I'm pretty sure this clown isn't interesting enough to be pitted, but I'll point that he seems to think he's found a magic formula to get around the "no insult" rule in GD: name a group, heap all variety of insults on that group, then suggest that posters who disagree with you are members of that group. As a result, he can pile oodles and oodles of scorn of "liberals", imply that other posters are "liberals", and avoid getting banned for insulting the posters.

It falls apart, though, when the other posters fail to become defensive or recognize that they are members of the group described, or at least not the wildly exaggerated and caricatured version described.

Gadfly
01-10-2004, 08:33 PM
About as sharp as a platypus.

kniz
01-10-2004, 08:38 PM
There are nuts on both sides of the aisle.




Oh, if we could only ignore them all.

Gomez
01-10-2004, 08:51 PM
Call me nitpicky but I think your thread title should read 'Razorsharp versus anyone who isn't ripped to the tits on blue star acid'.

labmonkey
01-10-2004, 08:52 PM
originally posted by Razorsharp :
"The orthodoxy of liberalism is really comical. For instance, in the realm of religion, or rather, anti-religion, there is no creation, we evolved.

But, when pointing out differences between the races, groups, sub-species or whatever "invented" category, that can be attributed to evolution, liberals start wailing and stomping their feet, demanding that "we're all the same."


I'd just like to go ahead take offense to this as a fence-sitting atheist. Evolution is not orthodox dogma and there is no secret cabal of liberal scientists out to disprove the great and magical father in the sky. We don't care, except "goddidit" just isn't good science. Oh, and I won't even stomp my feet and try to explain to you how members of the same species may differ phenotypically, and(through the various processes of evolution, mind you) remain genotypically very similar.

cheddarsnax
01-10-2004, 09:00 PM
Gomez: I'd suggest a less verbose title: 'Razorsharp vs. Sanity'

Gyrate
01-11-2004, 06:47 AM
Originally posted by Bryan Ekers
I'll point that he seems to think he's found a magic formula to get around the "no insult" rule in GD: name a group, heap all variety of insults on that group, then suggest that posters who disagree with you are members of that group. As a result, he can pile oodles and oodles of scorn of "liberals", imply that other posters are "liberals", and avoid getting banned for insulting the posters. And why not? It's a tactic that worked for a long, long time for another right-wing Doper, before he eventually crossed the line.

BTW, if anyone feels that I may be misrepresenting Razorsharp's position here either through selective quoting or misleading juxtaposition of statements, I positively encourage you to visit the inked thread and read them in their original context.

Gyrate
01-11-2004, 06:49 AM
That should read "linked thread", not "inked thread". Oops.

gluteus maximus
01-11-2004, 07:13 AM
Conservatives (http://www.ucomics.com/rallcom/2004/01/05/) for a softer, gentler conservatism.

El_Kabong
01-11-2004, 07:46 AM
I find Razorsharp's "obsession" with categorizing "liberals", as some absurdly broad and monolithic group that "moves as one" toward a common goal of, er, well, what is the goal exactly, completely "bizarre".

This guy's "crazier than a sack of squirrels", but for some reason, what really gets "up my snout" with him is his constant, seemingly random use of "quotation marks". What in the name of Karl, Chico and Zeppo Marx is the purpose of putting "hate-crime", "talk radio", "D.C. sniping" and "expert", among other phrases, in quotes?

So very sorry to be "wailing and stomping my feet" about "this" triviality.

iampunha
01-11-2004, 09:10 AM
To denigrate them without actually having to think of something wrong with them. It also serves to make one's adversary think that one is denigrating that thing, and when such a point is raised, the original poster can then claim "Well I didn't mean to, but if you think I was then it obviously speaks to your liberal bias..." etc.

robertliguori
01-11-2004, 10:10 AM
About as sharp as a platypus.


Platypi are actually quite sharp. They have toxic bone spurs. But yes, Razorsharp is quite dull, both intellectually and to read. Why bother?

Michael Ellis
01-11-2004, 10:32 AM
He's about as sharp as a bowling ball.

BobLibDem
01-11-2004, 10:33 AM
[/Foghorn Leghorn] That boy, I say that boy is about as sharp as a bowling ball [Foghorn Leghorn/]

cards
01-11-2004, 10:58 AM
You know, all these bowling balls are starting to pile up.

iampunha
01-11-2004, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by robertliguori
Platypi are actually quite sharp. They have toxic bone spurs. But yes, Razorsharp is quite dull, both intellectually and to read. Why bother?

Because the only way to fight ignorance is to read what it orders its monkeys to type randomly.

Surely ... you didn't think Razorsharp's posts are meaningful or coherent, did you? Oh, no, dear sir. Not meant to be taken seriously at all. Razorsharp is like the bastard child of Justhink and ... oh, so many looney wingnuts from whom to choose. I'd go with Serlin, but Razordull has yet to rant about fat women or poofy hair.

sturmhauke
01-12-2004, 01:02 AM
I participated a little in that thread, but I found that Bryan Ekers and tomndebb kept making points I was going to make before I could commit them to electrons. It's rather amusing to watch Razorsharp's contortions as he attempts to defend his position, especially because he imagines he is doing a good job.

But since this is The BBQ Pittm, allow me to list some things Razorsharp is actually as sharp as:

a down pillow
Jupiter
anything built by Pierson's Puppeteers
air
water
a child's scissors
a tire
graphite
AOL customer service
a Frisbee
a lump of clay

Bryan Ekers
01-12-2004, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by sturmhauke
I participated a little in that thread, but I found that Bryan Ekers and tomndebb kept making points I was going to make before I could commit them to electrons.

Hey, you snooze you lose, pal.

sturmhauke
01-12-2004, 01:13 AM
And I see you've posted about 6 times as often as me since November 2000. This must be some sort of liberal conspiracy to make me look bad.

Dewey Cheatem Undhow
01-12-2004, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by gluteus maximus
Conservatives (http://www.ucomics.com/rallcom/2004/01/05/) for a softer, gentler conservatism. Good Lord. What would happen if we locked Rall and Razorsharp in a room together for a few hours?

Bryan Ekers
01-12-2004, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by Dewey Cheatem Undhow
Good Lord. What would happen if we locked Rall and Razorsharp in a room together for a few hours?

Clean energy with the occasional gamma ray?

Gyrate
02-07-2004, 07:58 PM
I came across this relevant passage on someone's LiveJournal and thought this was a good place to attach it (rather than start a new thread):Isaiah 32 (King James Version):

5 The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said to be bountiful.
6 For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the LORD, to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail.
7 The instruments also of the churl are evil: he deviseth wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words, even when the needy speaketh right.
8 But the liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand.
Wa-hey! God likes liberals! And as for non-liberals who "deviseth wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words", well... nuff said.

EddyTeddyFreddy
02-07-2004, 09:32 PM
Razorsharp needs to spend more time -- like a few millennia -- under a pyramid.