I am an extremist. And I take great pride in it and look down my nose at half-thought-out political perspectives. (Despite the fact that the political perspective that I embrace is at best half-thought-out).
Hearts that bleed have been inflamed by rhetoric, usually. They usually belong to liberals (conservatives are better wooed by appeals to bleeding portfoliios).
The nice thing about liberals is that in theory at least they believe in government according to detached principle. The bad thing about liberals is that most of them jump directly to the prepackaged conclusions that have been disseminated, without adequately questioning the supposedly idealistic values that supposedly gave rise to them.
The nice thing about conservatives is that in theory they are pragmatic and want to see how things would actually play out for all the players, and, more centrally, how it would affect their own interestst. The bad thing about conservatives is that most of them jump blindly into acceptance of whatever prepackaged conclusion is the current dissemination popular with the right-oriented media, without adequately questioning the assumptions and postulates that have been embraced and/or grandfathered in without rigorous questioning and skepticism.
Usually, cause-wise, the liberals are on target. Usually, as a result of the conservatives being too immersed in the status quo, the liberals are on-target in the early stages of “what do do about it”. (Althought they are capable of tromping on the needs and concerns of one contingent as as result of ascribing value to the concerns of another, liberals are often kind of inclined to want to divide the world into black and white to the dismay of folks whose confrontations fall into grey areas, see Jewish versus Palestinian and Treatment-rights of people with psychiatric disabilities versus rights of people to refuse treatment in absence of due process aka psychiatic inmates’ liberation movement. Sometimes the conservatives are better allies with regards to “disinterested equal protection” although that protection is generally only available to those who have resources such as the owership of private property
Usually, pragmatism-wise, the conservatives are aligned with their own interests. More often than not, this is short-circuited by (media-driven) definitions of who “us” is, isolating those with investment wherewithal and encouraging them to invest in political strategies that best appeal to to the (short-term) advantage of their investment interests. Using fear of official acquisition (“the government could come after your resources and TAKe THEM AWAY”), conservative spokespersons in the media caricature the silliest extremes of liberal initiative and thought and attempt to unify people in a combination of embrace-of-status-quo plus embrace-of-status-quo-ante, with a fair amount of “cherry-picking” embedded so as to graft a respect for common-sense egalitarianism (which is an under-recognized conservative strength that deserves kudos and mentions) and overall fairness to an agenda that is committed to keeping the same people in power and increasing their hegemony and paying off major investors regardless of the advantages to the total political system of having done so while contributing very little if anything to the overall efficiency of the system and mostly gilding Corruption in the financial sense as a perquisite of having One’s Own Party In Power.
Fooey. To coin a phrase, I’ve made more sense when less in possession of really nice tequia.
I’ll stand by what I said if anyone is brave enough to try and parse it. But even as I sit here, hoisting more Sausa Tres Generaciones Añejo tequila as I read what I wrote, I gotta admit DAMN that just ain’t user-friendly.
Well, I’ve always liked Wendel Willkie’s definition of a liberal… “The liberal is the man who’s taken on the most difficult job of all…balancing the rights of the individual with the good of society.”
The earliest site for the term “bleeding heart” I can find is Bram Stoker’s “Dracula”. In chapter 13, the character Lucy has just been killed by the count, and Van Helsing the vampire hunter suspects he turned her into a vampire. So, after they bury her, Van Helsing goes to Dr. Seward, Lucy’s fiance’, and explains to him that the two of them have to go to the graveyard that night and cut off her head and cut her heart out.
Dr. Seward is, as you might imagine, appalled at the idea of desecrating the body of the woman he loved for, what appears to him, no good reason, and he says as much to Van Helsing.
takes a shot of tres gen
Cheers ** AHunter3**!
There are two reasons that I follow politics–one because I dislike the conservative agenda, and two because I dislike the liberal agenda. Check out the moderate libertarians, I like what they say, though it will be an uphill battle to elect them.
I’d say that labels are pretty much ridiculous - anyone whose political opinions and mental processes can, in entirety, with neither lack of accuracy nor clarity, be summed up in one word, should not be allowed to participate in government in a nation with more than one political issue.
I feel compelled to throw in and define another oft-used phrase: “knee-jerk”, which I used to describe someone who allows his initial instinctive reaction to form the basis of his response, with no intervention by his brain. One example is the sudden outrage felt when hearing about Asians working for miniscule wages making sneakers. It’s easy to rail and complain about Nike, but somewhat harder to come up with other ways to keep those Asians from starving to death.
Dagnabbit – if I knew y’all were going to be so rational about this, I’d have started this in GD.
Some of the more egregious of the recent culprits in throwing these terms around have recently been banned (for other reasons); however, if anyone sees an instance of this somewhere on the SDMB, do point the perpetrator in this direction.
I made a choice to join the military. I didn’t choose to have my taxes raised to excessive levels so that we could create a welfare state.
This question begged for stereotypes, I just provided one. Do you dispute that liberals are generally the originators of social programs? Do you dispute that conservatives are generally against affirmative action and welfare?
yohimbo, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Where were you with my handout when I was out on the street? That’s right, you were with the rest that didn’t talk to me. So tell me about mean.
You wanna know what the difference between me and a liberal is? I’ll see a guy on the street, get him something to eat, talk to him, and give him a few bucks. That’s my choice. The liberals take my money and put it into welfare, an insanely bloated and ineffective program, whereupon the only communication with the poor is in the monthly handout line, if they’re even lucky enough to qualify.
Wanna dispute that? I’ve seen it with my own damn eyes.
No, sir. you insinuated, through a lame joke, that liberals are stupid. I will readily admit that liberals are the originators of social programs. I will also admit that many programs are badly run and some even ill-concieved.
A different country working or in school. That’s were I was. I give to beggars all the time. I also give on a monthly basis by direct debit to several charities one of which just deals with the homeless in Ireland and would be very willing for more money to come out of my pay if it was going to house and feed people, so kindly fuck off with your where was I comments and would be very willing for more money to come out of my
You say that a liberal has a problem with their conscience. I turned it a little on you rather than on them. Why do you have to have a problem with your conscience to want to help people who aren’t as lucky as you. I grew up with fuck all money in my family but was lucky to have loving and giving parents who worked hard to keep their kids away from trouble. When me and my sister grew up it was the four of us against the world as far as we were concerned. We always support each other. One problem is all of our problem.
Some people aren’t as lucky as me and I like helping them were I can. I’ve no problem with my conscience. Either do you. Try thinking of another reason why “liberals” are liberals coz your way off IMO.
You don’t have to worry about that as my understanding of a welfare state is not the US as I think you can attest to. If you did live in such a state you yourself have said that you’d probably think different about it. I don’t need to have been given something in the past to give it myself.
Oh a please don’t get the impression that I’m bigging up Ireland here. Our treatment of the homeless and needy is a fucking disgrace IMO.
Conservatives aren’t ruled by emotions like liberals are? Yeah, as if.
As if conservatives get some special pass on feeling and acting on emotion. Science fucking fiction if you ask me.
Liberals are ruled by an emotion called compassion. Conservatives, most often, are ruled by an emotion called rage, but are often in denial about it. Honestly, which sounds better to you?
So what are you saying, that we care and you don’t?
Unless you can prove that yohimbo himself (herself?) was one of those folks who brushed you aside, this is just bullshit.
As for where I was, I was the guy paying taxes that I hope would be going to help the misfortunate and downtrodden. If you came up to me and asked for a few bucks, I’d probably comply, assuming I had any to spare. Though I don’t recall any instances of brusquely ignoring homeless folks on the streets, I’m sure you’ll be glad to fabricate such an example any second now.
How do you ever manage to tote a brush that big, man? :rolleyes:
