# Liberals are supposed to be so \_\_\_\_\_\_, but they \_\_\_\_. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 24, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105 "2005-03-24T23:13:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/1 "2005-03-24T23:13:08Z")
This is a non-Terri-Schiavo-related thread, but is inspired by this: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5983401&postcount=181](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5983401&postcount=181) It would be a hijack to post this there, so here’s a new thread. I’m more than a little tired of these conservative attempts at exposing all liberals for hypocrites by extremely disingenious generalizations of their philosophies and willfull misapplication of those generalizations to specific circumstances. These can all be reduced to the form, “You liberals are supposed to be \_\_\_\_\_\_, but you \_\_\_\_\_\_.” Take, for example, **SA** ’s statement here: > [@](#): > > I’ve always thought one of the main tenets of liberalism is that we are all human beings and we are all equal in terms of intelligence and ability. Blacks and women are no different than men [sic], and the people of any one particular country are no better in such terms than the people of another country. Many liberals argue for LEGAL and SOCIAL equality. None to my knowledge has argued that we are “all equal in terms of intelligence and ability.” Another argument I often hear is that “liberals are supposed to be so tolerant, but they don’t tolerate [some kind of hateful/oppressive/stupid ideology].” Liberals argue for various kinds of tolerance, it’s true, but nobody to my knowledge has argued for moral and political ambivilence, which is what you’re really talking about. Conservatives want us to prove our tolerance by being uncritical of fatheadedness and evilness. But tolerance and ambivilence are not the same thing. Then there’s the argument Michael Moore (or Soros, or some other wealthy liberal) is, in fact, wealthy, and that this somehow undermines their position. Liberals may support social equity. Certainly they oppose economic oppression. But many of us, me included, are basically capitalists. We got nothing against wealth, just against privilege. We are liberals. We have an ideology of social and economic justice, but we give no pretense to being ascetic egalitarians possessed of Christlike love and understanding. Please knock it off with the exaggerated ideals we’re supposed to live up to just so you can prove we don’t live up to them. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2005, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/2 "2005-03-24T23:31:26Z")
Excellent OP, **cricetus**. When your strawmen get up and start dancing down the yellow brick road, it’s time to turn off the hate radio. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2005, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/3 "2005-03-24T23:42:22Z")
Well refuted **Hentor** that showed him. Yes **SA** was wrong it what he said he thought Liberal ideas were all about. What exactly is surprising about that? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2005, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/4 "2005-03-24T23:47:02Z")
> [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > Well refuted **Hentor** that showed him. > > Yes **SA** was wrong it what he said he thought Liberal ideas were all about. What exactly is surprising about that? I wasn’t refuting him. I was agreeing with him. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2005, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/5 "2005-03-24T23:59:34Z")
Sorry about the missunderstanding. I thought you were complaining the OP was making straw men. I think I’ll go back to GQ and GD it’s too complicated for me down here in the pit 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/6 "2005-03-25T00:00:10Z")
Amen, **cricetus**! I couldn’t agree more. Especially the “so much for tolerance… :rolleyes:” in response to liberal criticism of, well, anything really. Makes me want to drive a fork through someone’s forehead. (How’s _that_ for tolerance?) ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/7 "2005-03-25T00:36:06Z")
No, no, no! You stab the fork through their _hand_! Sheesh – methinks you need a refresher course in one of the Liberal Ideology Indoctrination And Whinefest Camps.[sup]TM[/sup] ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/8 "2005-03-25T00:37:36Z")
- :: jabs **EddyTeddyFreddy** in the butt with a fork :: \* ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/9 "2005-03-25T01:20:14Z")
We will have no buttforking here, please. To be fair, **SA** is one of the worst of our resident right-wingers about this. He regularly spews statements that can be grouped and paraphrased as, “I will imagine you engaging in some negative behavior, and then condemn you for it.” I’m not sure it’s fair to use him as a bad example with which to tarnish the rest of them. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/10 "2005-03-25T01:34:31Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > We will have no buttforking here, please. > > To be fair, **SA** is one of the worst of our resident right-wingers about this. He regularly spews statements that can be grouped and paraphrased as, “I will imagine you engaging in some negative behavior, and then condemn you for it.” I’m not sure it’s fair to use him as a bad example with which to tarnish the rest of them. One hates to say such things, but… Cite?? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/11 "2005-03-25T02:40:31Z")
> [@](#): > > Another argument I often hear is that “liberals are supposed to be so tolerant, but they don’t tolerate [some kind of hateful/oppressive/stupid ideology].” Liberals argue for various kinds of tolerance, it’s true, but nobody to my knowledge has argued for moral and political ambivilence, which is what you’re really talking about. Conservatives want us to prove our tolerance by being uncritical of fatheadedness and evilness. Well, to be Devil’s Advocate here (or at least a minor demon’s advocate, in the case of **SA** ), this is pretty strawmanesque. The usual argument one hears is not that it is impermissable to critique “hateful” views, but that it is less than tolerant to refuse to allow them to be heard or to punish the holders of said views beyond criticism, ostracism or loud guffaws. Of course, when the supposed champions of tolerance are people like David Horowitz, it is possible to get really really confused. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/12 "2005-03-25T02:48:13Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Well, to be Devil’s Advocate here (or at least a minor demon’s advocate, in the case of **SA** ), this is pretty strawmanesque. > > The usual argument one hears is not that it is impermissable to critique “hateful” views, but that it is less than tolerant to refuse to allow them to be heard or to punish the holders of said views beyond criticism, ostracism or loud guffaws. Now it’s my turn. Cite? Show me where liberals are actually wanting “to punish holders of said views beyond criticism, ostracism, or loud guffaws.” ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/13 "2005-03-25T03:12:42Z")
> [@cricetus](#): > > Now it’s my turn. Cite? Show me where liberals are actually wanting “to punish holders of said views beyond criticism, ostracism, or loud guffaws.” Try Lawrence Summers. Remember? Harvard President? Controversial/dumb remarks on women in science? Seems to be a fair sentiment among the faculty to boot him out, judging by the recent no-confidence vote. The argument could be made that that goes beyond “tolerance”. And it _is_ being made by various right-wing columnists who have adopted Summers as a sort of poster child. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/14 "2005-03-25T03:21:59Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Try Lawrence Summers. > > Remember? Harvard President? Controversial/dumb remarks on women in science? > > Seems to be a fair sentiment among the faculty to boot him out, judging by the recent no-confidence vote. The argument could be made that that goes beyond “tolerance”. > > And it _is_ being made by various right-wing columnists who have adopted Summers as a sort of poster child. OK. I thought you (or someone) would mention hate crimes, which is intolerance for mild form of terrorism. But the Harvard thing is a good example, since there was a pretty reactive treatment of some casual out-the-ass comments. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/15 "2005-03-25T05:33:22Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Try Lawrence Summers. > > Remember? Harvard President? Controversial/dumb remarks on women in science? > > Seems to be a fair sentiment among the faculty to boot him out, judging by the recent no-confidence vote. The argument could be made that that goes beyond “tolerance”. > > And it _is_ being made by various right-wing columnists who have adopted Summers as a sort of poster child. That’s fine, as long as it goes both ways. Which means Ward Churchill gets a pass too. Frankly, both of them said ridiculous things that embarrassed their universities. I don’t think either school should be forced to appear to condone their idiotic views. But one happens to say something that comes close to a conservative pet issue, and the other sounds like Noam Chomsky got drunk on cheap wine. Why should anyone get a pass on saying stupid things? And why does that only seem to apply when they say stupid things that Ann Coulter agrees with? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/16 "2005-03-25T06:57:11Z")
To return to the OP for a moment, he’s right: this tactic is ubiquitous and very, very tiresome. On another board I regularly communicate with someone who seems to lack the brainpower to make up an reply that doesnt’ so “If Liberals are so \_\_\_\_\_\_, how come nobody is/what about \_\_\_\_\_\_?” It’s not even an argument, it’s a distraction. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/17 "2005-03-25T07:38:03Z")
**cricetus** , your OP expresses a gripe that I have about _some_ conservative posters when you say: > [@](#): > > I’m more than a little tired of these conservative attempts at exposing all liberals for hypocrites by extremely disingenious generalizations of their philosophies and willfull misapplication of those generalizations to specific circumstances. The quote from **Starving Artist** does, at first, appear to be a generalization of liberal philosophy – and not a particularly carefully worded one. (Sometimes that is a sign of a state of pissedness.) But I don’t think that his generalization was disingenious. Although **SA** and I frequently disagree on political issues, there is no doubt in my mind that he _does_ see liberal philosophy as being one of compassion and a vision of equality and does not understand what he interprets to be lapses in this compassion. **Starving Artist** , if I have misrepresented your viewpoint, just tell me to fork off. > [@](#): > > **Cervaise** : To be fair, SA is one of the worst of our resident right-wingers about this. He regularly spews statements that can be grouped and paraphrased as, “I will imagine you engaging in some negative behavior, and then condemn you for it.” I’m not sure it’s fair to use him as a bad example with which to tarnish the rest of them. “To be fair…I’m not sure it’s fair.” Now which is it, **Cervaise**? Anyway, let’s tarnish all of them. I’m in! ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/18 "2005-03-25T10:37:58Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > **cricetus** , your OP expresses a gripe that I have about _some_ conservative posters when you say: > > The quote from **Starving Artist** does, at first, appear to be a generalization of liberal philosophy – and not a particularly carefully worded one. (Sometimes that is a sign of a state of pissedness.) But I don’t think that his generalization was disingenious. Although **SA** and I frequently disagree on political issues, there is no doubt in my mind that he _does_ see liberal philosophy as being one of compassion and a vision of equality and does not understand what he interprets to be lapses in this compassion. > > **Starving Artist** , if I have misrepresented your viewpoint, just tell me to fork off. No, you are quite right. I would add though that to me liberal lapses in things they’ve always championed such as compassion, fairness, equality, and tolerance are not only things I don’t understand, but things which smack of hypocrisy. Yet in this thread and the one that spawned it, the attitude of the liberal contingent when confronted with these lapses seems to be “Yeah, what of it?” This is one [of the many] reasons I think so highly of you. You _work_ to have an open mind; you _work_ to be fair; you _work_ to see the other side; and you _work_ to avoid stereotypes. For this and innumerable other reasons, you da bomb! 😉 (I’m sure I will be in for lots of criticism over what may or may not be perceived as my deficiencies in these same areas, but I wanted to go on record as to just a few of the reasons why I think so highly of you. You work to “walk the talk,” so to speak, moreso than anybody on these boards that I can think of. My regard for you is immense.) ---
**Author:** ![margin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@margin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/margin)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/19 "2005-03-25T13:42:41Z")
See, I think there’s a big difference between Churchill and Summers. Summers is the head of the uni. He’s a dolt, but he’s a dolt who can affect the female student population. HE’s got a lot more power than Churchill, even if he is just as clueless. My favorite thing about conservatives is that in many arguments, they bring up Teddy Kennedy. “Well, at least my guy didn’t kill somebody.” Yeah, so it’s okay for a conservative to do anything up to murder and they get a pass? Yeah, morals and all that. Nope, it’s what you can get away with. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2005, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105/20 "2005-03-25T13:57:50Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > One hates to say such things, but… > > Cite?? Click on the Starving Artist name, which will open a drop down menu. Chose the “Find All Posts by Starving Artist”. Or [Cite](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/search.php?searchid=776484). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-are-supposed-to-be-so-______-but-they-____/296105.md?page=2)