For all the new, "open minds". Step 2 is where most fail.

Step 1: Admitting that you're a liberal

This is the first step for every liberal on the way to recovery. It is important to understand that you're not "progressive", "moderate", or "enlightened". You're a liberal, and you need to be honest with yourself about that fact.

Step 2: Pledge to support your beliefs with facts.

Realize that truth is more important than moral superiority and is the only way to come over to reality. You must research beyond propaganda from the Sierra Club, Hilllary Clinton, and CNN to understand things as they really exist in the world. You can no longer argue based on "feelings" or emotion. You will actually need to back up your arguments with real information. This is a difficult step, because it means you can't be lazy any more.

Step 3: Love America

This may be the most difficult step for those of you who are hippies and peaceniks. Admitting that the country you hate actually stands as a beacon to defend freedom throughout the world can make some of you physically ill. You might want to make a visit to a military cemetery to better understand that these men and women gave their lives so that you could spew hatred. Otherwise, you would currently be living in a police state that would never let you wear that nasty patchouli oil, let alone speak out against your government.

Step 4: Take a college level economics class

A Socialist is defined as someone who's never taken an economics class. Most Socialists have a hard time balancing their checkbooks, let alone explaining the simple concept of supply-and-demand. It's time to flush your complete ignorance of basic economics down the toilet and understand how the world actually functions. This concept will be very important for the next steps that involve communism, facts about corporations, and the inefficiencies of government.

Step 5: Say "no" to Communism and Socialism

While this concept is obvious to most of the free world, it is an important step in your recovery process. If you have difficulty with this step, spend a week living and working in Cuba.

Step 6: Corporations are not evil

If you're reading this article on-line or in an email, it's thanks to corporations. If you get some kind of paycheck, you can thank corporations. If you work for a nonprofit or the government, you still have to thank corporations. The nonprofit sector and the government wouldn't have any money to pay you without corporations. It is also important that you understand that making a profit doesn't equate to "greed" or exploitation. Capitalism has created the greatest society in our world's history. Even communist countries need corporations to survive, so enjoy a nice, hot cup of reality.

Step 7: The government is inefficient

If you are one of those liberals who believe the government should tax us more in order to take care of society, you need to pay special attention to this step. You need to realize that government bureaucracy will waste most of your tax dollars, while the private sector will put your money to much better use. Even most Democrat politicians understand this to some degree, which is why Hillary's socialist healthcare proposal was voted down by a majority of both Democrats and Republicans. Go to your local post office or call the IRS to ask a tax question if you need a reminder about government inefficiency.

Step 8: The earth is not your "mother", and she's not dying

The time has now come to stop your donations to Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, and every other EnviroNazi organization to which you belong. Face the reality that the earth, society and our environment are better off today than ever in recorded history and that they are continuing to improve. I realize that many of you tree huggers will have a very difficult time letting go of the Douglas Fir on this one. I would suggest reading The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg. Mr. Lomborg is a former member of Greenpeace and is currently a statistics professor at a university in Denmark. He set out to prove the world was in bad shape and ended up surprising himself by proving the exact opposite.

Step 9: Stop smoking the wacky tobacco

Okay, some of you might need to enter another 12-step program to complete this step. Marijuana is distorting your sense of reality, and you need to stop using it. Besides, you'll save a fortune on snacks.

Step 10: Eat a hamburger

If God didn't intend for us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat. You can put your sprouts and tofu on the hamburger, but get some meat into you. You'll look and feel better than you ever imagined. You can always remind yourself that Nazi propaganda hailed Adolf Hitler as a vegetarian to get you through this step.

Step 11: Stop re-writing political history

It's now time to admit that Bill Clinton is a lying-cheating-sexist-racist-rapist jackass, Hillary Clinton is one of the worst role models for women in this country, Al Gore really did lose the 2000 election by every vote tabulation you attempt, Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War and didn't create the homeless problem, John McCain is not a typical Republican, and Jimmy Carter is a nice man but has one of the worst presidential records of anyone in history.

Step 12: Be a missionary

Once you have completed the previous steps to overcoming liberalism, it's time for you to share this awakening with others who are not as fortunate. Go out amongst the liberal sheep and spread the good word of your freedom from the chains of ignorance that once bound you. Congratulations, and welcome to reality.

8/18/2005 7:33:00 AM

8/18/2005 7:34:52 AM

Quote :

"You can no longer argue based on 'feelings' or emotion."

8/18/2005 8:00:01 AM

^^^Are you going to cite your source, or are you plagiarising and hoping we'll believe you came up with that yourself?

8/18/2005 8:08:23 AM

8/18/2005 8:10:43 AM

steps 9 and 10 dont fit b/c if God made animals so we should eat them then God made pot with THC in it so we should smoke it.

who ever wrote this is on coke and prolly Bush's drinking buddy.

8/18/2005 8:19:38 AM

Quote :

"OUR UNFEELING PRESIDENT Bush cannot grieve because he doesn't know what death is By E.L. DOCTOROW Editor's note: The article below was written by novelist E.L. Doctorow for The East Hampton Star, and was originally published on Sept 9, 2004. Since that time the number of American war dead in Iraq has risen to more than 1,800. ADVERTISEMENT I fault this president for not knowing what death is. He does not suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who wanted to be what they could be. On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear. But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it. You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the weapons of mass destruction he can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving, triumphal, a he-man. He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for him to look solemn or a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in the depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not feel a personal responsibility for the 1,000 dead young men and women who wanted to be what they could be. They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or wives and children who will suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of aborted life ... they come to his desk as a political liability, which is why the press is not permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq. How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret, and he regrets nothing. He does not regret that his reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the facts. He does not regret that his bungled plan for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a disaster. He does not regret that, rather than controlling terrorism, his war in Iraq has licensed it. So he never mourns for the dead and crippled youngsters who have fought this war of his choice. He wanted to go to war, and he did. He had not the mind to perceive the costs of war, or to listen to those who knew those costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war when it is one of the options, but when it is the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have to. Yet this president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator. He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to have a mind for only one thing — to take power, to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of themselves and their friends. A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader. The country gets behind you. Dissent becomes inappropriate. And so he does not drop to his knees, he is not contrite, he does not sit in the church with the grieving parents and wives and children. He is the president who does not feel. He does not feel for the families of the dead, he does not feel for the 35 million of us who live in poverty, he does not feel for the 40 percent who cannot afford health insurance, he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills — it is amazing for how many people in this country this president does not feel. But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is relieving the wealthiest 1 percent of the population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and that he is polluting the air we breathe for the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the quality of air in coal mines to save the coal miners' jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a-half benefits for overtime because this is actually a way to honor them by raising them into the professional class. And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of it. But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I remember the millions of people here and around the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that spontaneous aroused oversoul of alarm and protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After all, this was not the only war anyone had ever seen coming. There are little wars all over the world most of the time. But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of people that America was ceding its role as the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the classic archetype of democracy was morphing into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was turning its back on the future, using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war. The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast in his image. The trouble they get into and get us into, is his characteristic trouble. Finally, the media amplify his character into our moral weather report. He becomes the face of our sky, the conditions that prevail. How can we sustain ourselves as the United States of America given the stupid and ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving, and the monarchal economics of this president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as to make us mourn for ourselves. "

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/editorial/outlook/3309407

8/18/2005 8:29:35 AM

Quote :

"Step 6: Corporations are not evil "

of course

8/18/2005 8:31:59 AM

pryderi fials at step 2. What a fucking shock.

8/18/2005 8:52:15 AM

Quote :

"steps 9 and 10 dont fit b/c if God made animals so we should eat them then God made pot with THC in it so we should smoke it. who ever wrote this is on coke and prolly Bush's drinking buddy. "

of course it fits! it condradicts it itself....so its a good representation of the conservative who wrote it.

8/18/2005 8:56:35 AM

I actually got a good kick out of that. Has anyone read that book by Bjorn Lomborg?

8/18/2005 9:57:58 AM

HAHAHA....pryderi....i never get tired of laughing at that guy

Quote :

"pryderi fials at step 2. What a fucking shock"

[Edited on August 18, 2005 at 11:13 AM. Reason : asdf]

8/18/2005 11:06:26 AM

So why is it that so many conservatives have some weird fixation with defining liberals?

8/18/2005 11:07:43 AM

Quote :

"Step 10: Eat a hamburger If God didn't intend for us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat. You can put your sprouts and tofu on the hamburger, but get some meat into you. You'll look and feel better than you ever imagined. You can always remind yourself that Nazi propaganda hailed Adolf Hitler as a vegetarian to get you through this step. "

If I eat a hamburger I feel like shit afterwards. I can't see how people can eat beef. I did when I was younger, but haven't in about 5 years. I feel much better not eating beef than I would if I did eat it. Give me some chicken or fish and it's a different story.

8/18/2005 11:12:59 AM

Obviously this is a ridiculous topic, but I'm going to lightly respond anyway.

1.) You can, in fact, be progressive, moderate, and enlightened without being a "liberal." Jesus was enlightened, many conservatives are progressive, and John McCain is a moderate.

2.) Same to the person who wrote this. Good Grief

3.) The idea that "hippies and peaceniks" generally "hate America" is patently false. It's a straw man. Also, I know some conservatives who "hated america," but they've started to like it more now that George Bush is the president.

4.) Done, but I'm not economically "liberal," anyway. Also, many conservatives don't understand economics, either.

5.) Done. The government controlling every aspect of my life is awful. Also, you don't have to be a liberal to want big government. Example: The Bush Administration.

6.) No, corporations are not evil. Some corporations are evil, and corporations that try and control the government are causing alot of harm, and many corporations (probably most) take the bottom line over protecting the environment and their consumers, and usually their employees. That doesn't make corporations evil in a general sense, but they do need to be monitored. Also, you don't ahve to be a liberal to think that corporations need to be regulated.

7.) Agreed. Let's get rid of it. See my response to 5.

8.) The Earth is my mother, and she's yours too. She's also your father. Without the Earth, you wouldn't be alive, so I'd say that makes her even more important than your mother. Greenpeace is a bit radical, but the Sierra club is a respectable conservation group. And no, the earth is not dying. An estimated 200 species go extinct every day, but the Earth itself will survive far after we are gone, and life will come back to the thriving levels it once enjoyed. It may take a few millenia, but the Earth will be fine. Also, you don't have to be a liberal to be an environmentalist.

9.) I like my wacky tobacco, but I only smoke it about once a month We'll stop smoking it if everyone else stops drinking and smoking cigarettes. Also, you don't have to be a liberal to smoke pot.

10.) I like meat. Industrialy produced meat is the problem, not meat itself, and also, we eat too much of it. A good healthy serving of red meat every couple of days is good for you and not bad for the environment, unless it's industrially produced. Then, it's awful. However, yes, people are omnivores. You can have a very healthy diet without eating meat, but it takes work. Personally, I just limit my meat intake and supplement it with beans, legumes, and other protein sources. Also, there are Conservative vegetarians, and I doubt most liberals are vegetarians.

11.) I haven't rewritten much political history myself, but if you're going to call Bill Clinton a rapist, I think that I'm not the one who needs to be told to stop making shit up.

12.) I see you've already begun this step by posting on TWW. Good for you.

[Edited on August 18, 2005 at 11:13 AM. Reason : ,]

8/18/2005 11:13:08 AM

fuck the earth

8/18/2005 11:16:40 AM

HEY, GOOD COMEBACK!
YOU SHOULD BE IN MOVIES

8/18/2005 11:22:43 AM

OMG YOU WANT TO FUCK YOUR MOM?

8/18/2005 11:28:16 AM

"Take a college level economics course"

Reading this, I assume I am to believe that you have done so, and therefore know everything about economics, and are therefore right. I have taken said economics class, actually two of them, but I will concede that you know more than I do, so I am not arguing for myself.

My question though, is this: Are you saying that after your high level economics class(es) that you are smarter and know more about our economy than say, Paul Krugman?

8/18/2005 11:41:18 AM

Quote :

" An estimated 200 species go extinct every day"

This is complete bullshit.

8/18/2005 12:00:54 PM

Yea its probably higher.

8/18/2005 12:03:43 PM

http://www.daveschultz.com/maniacal/overcomingliberalism.htm


is the actual author.

GGMon edited it for some content. Apparently he doesn't think CNN stands for "Communist News Network."

8/18/2005 12:08:41 PM

So you're a liberal if you present a clear understanding of science as it relates to the present and future.

Heres a thought. With all our electronic, communication, gps, wireless internet, why are we still powering it with black goop from the earth. Seems a little weird hydrogen power is no longer mainstream talk since bush came to power. All in all somethings got to change.

[Edited on August 18, 2005 at 12:09 PM. Reason : /]

8/18/2005 12:09:34 PM

estimated 200 species. By the way, most of these are rare rainforest species, because an estimated 35 of them go extinct every day. Not sure where those estimates come from, I'll admit, but The forces of destruction such as logging, cattle ranching and overpopulation have all contributed to the loss of millions of acres of tropical rainforest... so it' snot hard to believe.

But, I mean, what if it's only 50 species a day? or 10? Is 10 extinct species per day a fair number to give us good reason to keep doing what we're doing?

by the way, the dictionary definition of "liberalism"

Quote :

" 1. The state or quality of being liberal. 2. 1. A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority. 2. often Liberalism The tenets or policies of a Liberal party. 3. An economic theory in favor of laissez-faire, the free market, and the gold standard. 4. Liberalism 1. A 19th-century Protestant movement that favored free intellectual inquiry, stressed the ethical and humanitarian content of Christianity, and de-emphasized dogmatic theology. 2. A 19th-century Roman Catholic movement that favored political democracy and ecclesiastical reform but was theologically orthodox. "

so, I don't know how much of that you want to "overcome," but I was under the impression most of that was on par with modern conservativism, except maybe the "natural goodness of humans"

[Edited on August 18, 2005 at 12:21 PM. Reason : .]

8/18/2005 12:14:09 PM

Quote :

"Step 9: Stop smoking the wacky tobacco Okay, some of you might need to enter another 12-step program to complete this step. Marijuana is distorting your sense of reality, and you need to stop using it. Besides, you'll save a fortune on snacks. "

one stoner i know has to be the most conservative bush-supporting red-neck ever

8/18/2005 12:39:07 PM

well, as he said,

Quote :

"Marijuana is distorting your sense of reality, and you need to stop using it"

8/18/2005 12:50:14 PM

i wish it really was 200 species a day.

8/18/2005 12:53:35 PM

i wish one of the species was man

one day the cockroaches will take their place as the rightfull caretakers of this planet

8/18/2005 12:55:41 PM

on a scale of 1-10 how bad is this thread?

8/18/2005 12:59:58 PM

Quote :

"there are Conservative vegetarians"

Really? Are you sure about this?

Hmm... nevermind, I know one (sort of)

How about Conservative vegans?

8/18/2005 1:09:39 PM

1.) I don't consider myself a liberal, even though I get called one on a regular basis.
2.) who says only liberals argue with emotions?
3.) I do love america
6.) some corporations are "evil".
8.) I don't donate to sierra club or greenpeace, however I do donate to Earth First!
9.) I smoke
10.) I eat meat, and lots of it. I also kill half of the animals I consume.

I only answered th ones I felt qualified to. I'm a pretty mixed bag politcally. I also wish that in the soapbox we could have more interesting conversations than simply conservative or liberal bashing. you're not going to change anyone's mind.

8/18/2005 1:14:07 PM

^^

http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=96819a60636d5a7c850c64993a3d25c4&t=569

8/18/2005 1:17:54 PM

too much text

8/18/2005 1:19:57 PM

Quote :

"Really? Are you sure about this? Hmm... nevermind, I know one (sort of) "

Oooh! Oooh! That's me!

Right?

8/18/2005 2:20:30 PM

This is too funny...

Step 2: Pledge to support your beliefs with facts.

Realize that truth is more important than moral superiority and is the only way to come over to reality. You must research beyond propaganda from the Sierra Club, Hilllary Clinton, and CNN to understand things as they really exist in the world. You can no longer argue based on "feelings" or emotion. You will actually need to back up your arguments with real information. This is a difficult step, because it means you can't be lazy any more.

Tell this to the Terry Schiavo, Religous right, conservatives who make up all sorts of emotionally charged words. Furthermore, I suggest taking your own advice, referring to liberals as "peacenicks", "hippies", "EnviroNazi"s and telling us to "enjoy a nice, hot cup of reality." etcera (im sure I missed some) and then saying we should only argue with facts and not emotions and feelings is just a tad bit ironic.






Step 9: Stop smoking the wacky tobacco

Okay, some of you might need to enter another 12-step program to complete this step. Marijuana is distorting your sense of reality, and you need to stop using it. Besides, you'll save a fortune on snacks.


Smoking weed is something that conservatives do in droves as well, sorry to burst your bubble.



Step 3: Love America

This may be the most difficult step for those of you who are hippies and peaceniks. Admitting that the country you hate actually stands as a beacon to defend freedom throughout the world can make some of you physically ill. You might want to make a visit to a military cemetery to better understand that these men and women gave their lives so that you could spew hatred. Otherwise, you would currently be living in a police state that would never let you wear that nasty patchouli oil, let alone speak out against your government.

first of all, most liberals dont 'hate' america, but I can recall a number on the right who had some distasteful words when Democrats were in power. And if you think we have always been a beacon of freedom, you should ask the Haitians, Venezualans, Colombians, Africa, Iraq (after all we did put Saddam there in the first place), Nicaragua and others. This type of blind patriotism and nationlism is hardly what I call love, if you really love a country, you have to point out when it does wrong.



"You might want to make a visit to a military cemetery to better understand that these men and women gave their lives so that you could spew hatred."
Is that a line filled with emotion or what?





[Edited on August 18, 2005 at 3:30 PM. Reason : add more]

8/18/2005 3:21:51 PM

Actually, I was a Libertarian/Republican before I took an Economics class. My economic training has TURNED ME INTO A LIBERAL! Here's how most conversions go.

1) An intro to economics course will probably shatter most communists/central planners dreams of creating a government run utopia.

2) A more advanced economics course will probably shatter most Libetarian's misconceptions that the market is always the best allocater of resources.

3) An even more advanced level economics course will make you realize that science is no substitute for philosophy. To say what the government should and should not do requires moral arguments before economic arguments of how we should implent those goals.

8/18/2005 3:34:56 PM

You can always remind yourself that Nazi propaganda hailed Adolf Hitler as a vegetarian to get you through this step.

Bwahaahahahaaaa I laughed so hard when I read this.

Hitler was also protrayed by Nazi propoganda as a Chistian and Christ like figure. Now, this is absurd, but no more than what you stated (though I suspect this was probably copy pasted from somewhere)

8/18/2005 3:38:20 PM

^^bravo

8/18/2005 4:01:17 PM

Quote :

"To say what the government should and should not do requires moral arguments before economic arguments of how we should implent those goals."

Socks, could you rephrase this sentence for me? I am having difficulty understanding what you are saying "an even more advanced level economics course" will make you into. Perhaps you believe that the discussion is the thing? Put another way, it doesn't matter what policy the government/economy enacts, as long as the people have talked through the "moral arguments" and agreed on the course?

I'm sure I am misunderstanding you, because this would only beg the question of what the people should agree on.

[Edited on August 18, 2005 at 4:17 PM. Reason : .]

8/18/2005 4:17:07 PM

Quote :

"http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=96819a60636d5a7c850c64993a3d25c4&t=569 "

hmm, interesting

anti-choice seems somewhat common

I don't see many in the Sean Hannity category, though

8/18/2005 4:53:34 PM

I mean, the author could have at least included abortion in this.

8/18/2005 5:03:34 PM

WHAT GOOD HAS LIBERALISM EVER DONE FOR AMERICA?

8/18/2005 6:39:14 PM

Quote :

"Pledge to support your beliefs with facts."

+

Quote :

"Realize that truth is more important than moral superiority and is the only way to come over to reality."

followed by

Quote :

"If God didn't intend "

as defined:

self pwnt + what socks said = [/thread]

8/18/2005 8:10:03 PM

who ever wrote this shit must have also wrote the book on how to noob all over themselves

8/19/2005 12:33:43 AM

I just googled "Overcoming Liberalism: A 12-Step Program" and got 600 results virtually every one of them contained the exact content of the original post. (some were published more than a year ago).

Now now, dont you know that plagarism and ignoring copyrights is what a communist (not to mention, n00b) would do?

[Edited on August 19, 2005 at 2:07 AM. Reason : ]

8/19/2005 2:06:39 AM

LoneSnark,

Yah, that does sound confusing. my bad.

I only ment that one would realize that economics is no substitute for political philosophy. If you're trying to figure out whether the government should help the poor or not, economics wont help you much. Or put simply, economics answers the HOWS, while political philosophy answers the WHYS. Let me elaborate...

When one asks "what should government do?" (meaning the fundamental questions like whether the government should or should not provide national defense or assistance to the poor). Answering this question requires ethical arguments.

After we have decided what should do it, we must then ask HOW we will do it (meaning policy questions like HOW we will or will not defend the country or how we will or will not help the poor). Answering this question probably requires an understanding of how institutions and social groups work, which is exactly the kind of information economics (or sociology or other social sciences) provides.

Really, that's an over simplification, since I believe social sciences can inform ethical arguments. But basically I think this is an accurate description of where each field of study is most useful.

[Edited on August 19, 2005 at 2:45 AM. Reason : ``]

8/19/2005 2:44:30 AM

I never claimed ownership

8/19/2005 7:15:09 AM

Actually, you did by not citing who actually wrote it. It's not like this pile of garbage is common knowledge, so making such a statement shoud be cited if you are going to be a proper pundit.

8/19/2005 7:50:09 AM

I'll keep that in mind.

8/19/2005 8:51:00 AM

most professors around here need to go through this 12 step program

8/19/2005 10:01:30 AM