Im not gonna post all my entries, but hers a taste. enjoy

Quote :

"Oh my God, the patriot act is destroying our freedoms! The neo-cons are turning the US into a right wing fascist police state! Big Brother is watching you! The government is secretly torturing innocent detainees at Guantanamo Bay and depriving them of constitutional rights! Do these sentiments seem familiar? They should, for these have been the sentiments of the left for many years now. Well, actually, this has been the sentiment of the left for decades; I have just put a current events spin on it. Now the constitutional rights of terrorists is a subject for another day, but these first statements point out a very obvious hypocrisy of the left’s belief system. How is it that a liberal can bemoan the patriot act and the false belief that George Bush is somehow an Orwellian big brother, while at the same time preaching and working towards a system of government that grants the federal government greater and greater power over our daily lives. Now I will be the first to admit that I have my issues with things such as the patriot act, the presidency of George W. Bush and the current Republican Party but I have many more issues with the hypocrisy of big government liberals who seek to erode freedom, federalism and capitalism all in the name of fairness and so called tolerance. So again I ask, how can a liberal complain about the evil right wing police state? I will answer that later, but first lets high light the hypocrisy. Have you ever met a liberal who likes a corporation? I sure as hell have not. From Wal-Mart to insurance to big oil, liberals hate corporations. They hate the idea of corporate profits and capitalism in general. They support socialist wealth redistribution, big government regulations and government control of the economy, while at the same time calling the evil corporations greedy, heartless and inefficient. How is it a liberal can hate corporations, hate the stock market and hate a capitalist economy yet at the same time trust the most greedy, inefficient and bureaucratic entity on earth, the US federal government, to control it instead. This is the same government that destroyed social security, welfare and Medicare/Medicaid. It’s the same government that can’t maintain a budget, can’t spend money efficiently and can’t stop corruption, yet the liberals want to entrust them with more power, regulation and control. Hell lets give them our health care as well; I sure would like to trust my health decisions to Uncle Sam. Why do the liberals not see this? The answer is liberal hypocrisy, yet it is also much deeper than that as well and I will explain later. The truth is, and always has been, that the left desires a socialist/communist government. The same people that love their weed, hate the police and love their personal freedoms (hell I have nothing against personal freedom with proper consequences), are the very same people that desire a government and a state that has historically deprived their people of such freedoms and have oppressed the people terribly. Stalinist Russia, North Korea, North Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge, Cuba, Hugo’s Venezuela, Nazi Germany are but a few examples of a liberal’s “socialist paradise”. Hell, look at the oppressive Chinese government and their current situation with the Tibet protests. The same liberals who love their picket signs and protests desire a government that meets those protests with violent suppression. Anyone remember Tiananmen Square? The fact is not all socialism is a police state (yet), but it is a very slippery slope. Once you give the government more power and authority you sure as hell are not getting it back. And the simple truth is that the more socialist/communist a country becomes, the more oppressive and authoritarian the government becomes. This is not my personal opinion but historic fact. The same liberals that call George Bush big brother are calling for a path that inevitably leads to the suppression of legal rights, free speech, free press, free radio, internet access, freedom to protest, personal freedoms and the formation of secret police and gulags. Again I ask, why is this? Well I will tell you. To me, there are three types of liberals; and please note that I’m grossly generalizing here of course. The three types are: the hippies, the elitists and the ignorant masses. To me, the hippie category refers to any of the artsy, coffee shop, jam band, idealistic, guilty bleeding hearts and spoiled suburban college kids who naively think that a socialist system is actually better. They hate our country as it is and they think that they can fix it. They see the world as unfair, but believe it can somehow be fixed. Yes, the power of youthful idealism can cure the ills of the world that have existed since the dawn of time. These are the people that liberal hypocrisy most applies to because they simply just don’t seem to think about the true face of socialism. The same kids that smoke pot, protest in front of the campus student union and bitch about the police giving them a ticket are the ones who would love to see a socialist state. The same kid who has a “Free Tibet” poster in his dorm or on his car is the one who thinks socialism is a good thing. Sure they tend to be educated, with their liberal arts degrees, but they are too stupid to see into the face of history. Either that or they naively think they can get it right this time. “Sure it hasn’t worked in the past, but we have the power of youth and we can do anything! Rock the vote, fight the power man”. Basically, they are either complete idiots or are extremely naïve as to the path they want to go. In any case they are the most hypocritical based on the points I have already made. The second type of liberal is the ignorant masses. Sadly these people most likely are not liberal, they are just the uneducated masses that the liberals and Democratic Party prey upon. They include the blue collared working-man, the small town southern Democrat or the factory worker who lost his job. These people honestly think, or have been led to believe that their lives will be better under a liberal controlled socialist state. Of course these people often fail to see the true historical face of socialism. These are the proletariat that Marx wrote about. The liberals and modern Democratic Party need these people if they are to be voted into power. Maybe they vote Democratic because they think conservatives only represent the “rich man”, or maybe they have come to believe that wealth redistribution is a good thing and will help them (even though historically it hasn’t), maybe they vote Democratic out of tradition, or maybe it is simply that they are too uneducated to read between the lines and see through the lies and hypocrisy of the left. Also, it could be that some are merely lazy and only care about government handouts, but that’s another matter altogether. The simple truth is that these are the people who give the liberals their power. The final type is the elitists. These people include the Ivy League educated, the upper class snobs, and the limousine and Hollywood liberals. They are the Barack Obama liberals. In secret they scorn the values of patriotic, religious, blue collared Americans, while at the same time preying upon them for votes. They either feel that the masses are either too stupid or are too pitiful to make it on their own and therefore they need them as their liberal overlords. The elitists believe that only they should be allowed to make money, and they posses a “do as I say not as I do attitude”. They believe that they can spend your money better than you can, while at the same time lining their own pockets. These liberals only desire power and control over you, the ignorant masses. They are the ones who wish to rule over a new socialist state. Either by hubris or a thirst for power do they think they can perfect a socialist regime where others have failed. These liberals display extreme hypocrisy as well, but not to the extent that the hippie liberals do. The reason for this is because these are the people that desire the power or think that the policies of an oppressive state will not affect them, therefore they may not care as much about the atrocities of a socialist state. Just look at how many Hollywood liberals have cozied up to Hugo Chavez these days. In any case, the elitist liberals are the most dangerous to a free country. All they seek is power and control over the lives of average people, and through eloquent speeches, platitudes and false pretenses do they hope to achieve this. "

4/18/2008 12:20:44 AM

I can't even begin...I mean, honestly, words fail me to describe the level of [fail] in this post.

I'll initially even do you the favor of ignoring the rational shortcomings of the thing.

I can speak well to the quality of the spelling. The grammar, the tone, the writing style...all of these make the gargantuan pile of [fail] virtually unreadable. Nobody would have ever heard of Thomas Jefferson were he also a barely-literate font of vitriol like yourself. It also bears all the nuance and insight of an Ann Coulter piece, differentiating only between different classes of what would seem to be equally loathable "liberals" and their glorious conservative counterparts.

Now we'll go into the blatant fallacies of your "blog:"

Quote :

"Stalinist Russia, North Korea, North Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge, Cuba, Hugo’s Venezuela, Nazi Germany are but a few examples of a liberal’s “socialist paradise”."

You do realize, of course, that "national socialism" (AKA "Nazism") has about as much to do with actual socialism as the Democratic Republic of the Congo has to do with democracy or republics? Well, actually, you obviously do not, but we'll move on. We could list extremist governments on the right that of done equally horrific things as extremist governments on the left: fascists in Italy, Spain, Germany, and Japan, each of whom did their part (among other atrocities) to bring extreme leftism to the fore.

Quote :

"Hell, look at the oppressive Chinese government and their current situation with the Tibet protests."

I'm willing to bet that some Ethiopians protested fascist Italian intervention as well.

Quote :

"The fact is not all socialism is a police state (yet)"

Well, all fascism is already.

Honest to Christ, this is all I can stomach right now. I'll come back later.

4/18/2008 12:45:17 AM

thanks man, feedback is good. and yes i am well aware of extreme governments in name only, but they all bear the same traits. and plese note i am in no way advocating a right wing dictatorship

4/18/2008 12:56:33 AM

I don't think that you're in favor of right-wing dictatorship, and I'm also aware that writing style is a learnable skill. But, to that first point:

Any line of thinking that associates the American left (which is, by global standards, extremely moderate) with extreme leftist goals is similar to any line of thinking that would associate the American right (again, quite moderate by the standards of the world).

You can find, among Democratic politicians, a range of proto-socialist policies, just as, among Republicans, you can find a range of proto-fascist policies. This is because, among other things, American politics put far less stress on party loyalty than many other countries do. In this country you can be a little more or less extreme on a given point than your party's base without being exiled by the same.

Long story short: Democrats are no more a pack of commies than than Republicans are a pack of Nazis. To say anything else is to insult your own intelligence, to say nothing of the rest of us.

4/18/2008 1:03:47 AM

and yet the nazis were socialist with the militarism, nationalism and racial pride to make them fascist. But i agree with your point, which is why i said its a slippery slope and that not all socialism is oppressive, but merely that when you give the gov more power you dont get it back. so you are some what missing my point. i also admitted to gross generalizations.

also why ya gotta hate on a brothers writing, its not like its an incoherent grammatical mess




[Edited on April 18, 2008 at 1:12 AM. Reason : .]

4/18/2008 1:07:32 AM

Quote :

"and yet the nazis were socialist with the militarism, nationalism and racial pride to make them fascist. But i agree with your point, which is why i said its a slippery slope and that not all socialism is oppressive, but merely that when you give the gov more power you dont get it back."

All of this could easily apply to the current administration, which is clearly right-wing.

Quote :

"also why ya gotta hate on a brothers writing, its not like its an incoherent grammatical mess "

You know, to an extent, I won't mention it in a wolfweb post. But you make a blog, the intention is for people to read it thoughtfully. The same cannot be said for a post on this site. It's not that it is incoherent, but rather that...well, I suppose that it reflects poorly on this forum's ability to hone your skills, which, however meager they may be, have been better represented here than they were in that blog.

4/18/2008 1:21:03 AM

well im not sure what you mean, but i appreciate the feed back. also,

Quote :

"All of this could easily apply to the current administration, which is clearly right-wing."

i dont know how many times on here i have criticized the current administration and president. i dont support the increase of government power in most any form be it liberal or neo-con. i consider myself libertarian minus some of the crazy.

[Edited on April 18, 2008 at 1:29 AM. Reason : .]

4/18/2008 1:29:19 AM

LET ME TELL YOU WHAT LIBERALS REALLY THINK

I HAVE A UNIQUE INSIGHT ON THESE THINGS

4/18/2008 7:15:35 AM

The first rule to remember before starting any writing project is to respect the reader. You must realize that the reader has a variety of different things pulling at their attention than just your blog post. So that means in this case, you will want to keep your blog post as short as possible. Anything less is self-indulgent.

This doesn't mean there are word limits. Some blog posts can be longer than others. But you will want to keep the focus of your writing on the original contributions you have to the particular issue. Don't spend time repeating what the reader probably already knows.

Also, blogs are not books or opinion columns. They can be interactive. This means they can be even shorter because you don't have to address every concern or question in a single post. You can answer questions or comments as they come up from readers.

If I were you, I would probably delete the whole post. There really isn't anything original and it's stuffed full of over used cliches. It is also way way way too long. I recomend writing a post on a single issue, or even a single subcomponent of a particular issue, rather than harp on "liberals" in general.

[Edited on April 18, 2008 at 7:48 AM. Reason : ``]

4/18/2008 7:46:55 AM

A++ PARODY WOULD READ AGAIN!!!

4/18/2008 8:11:05 AM

Quote :

"To me, there are three types of liberals; and please note that I’m grossly generalizing here of course. The three types are: the hippies, the elitists and the ignorant masses. "

4/18/2008 9:00:56 AM

Quote :

"I don't think that you're in favor of right-wing dictatorship, and I'm also aware that writing style is a learnable skill. But, to that first point: Any line of thinking that associates the American left (which is, by global standards, extremely moderate) with extreme leftist goals is similar to any line of thinking that would associate the American right (again, quite moderate by the standards of the world). You can find, among Democratic politicians, a range of proto-socialist policies, just as, among Republicans, you can find a range of proto-fascist policies. This is because, among other things, American politics put far less stress on party loyalty than many other countries do. In this country you can be a little more or less extreme on a given point than your party's base without being exiled by the same. Long story short: Democrats are no more a pack of commies than than Republicans are a pack of Nazis. To say anything else is to insult your own intelligence, to say nothing of the rest of us. "

I agree with GrumpyGOP.

As government has progressed during my adult life, both parties have slided toward the viewpoint that the government should be in control of a lot of things (including, shockingly, the Republicans during George W. Bush's presidency). Hence, some of the Republican conservatives are becoming more fascist in their political outlook and the Democratic liberals are becoming more socialist in their political outlook. That's not everyone, but it applies to each party's leadership.

Americans by and large are idiots, in that they let each party's leaders rope them into thinking, "you have to vote for me, you don't want that other guy winning!", and that's the basis of our politics. It doesn't matter how stupid or unqualified the candidate is, you must vote for him to not let the other party win. By having our politics defined this way, it only encourages Republicans to become fascist and Democrats to become socialist. No one cares about third parties, and that also allows both parties' candidates to run to the fringes, cause most of them are in uncompetitive districts that would only let one party ever win, the only election that matters then is the winning party's primary, and the only people that show up for primaries predominantly are the "true believers".

If you're a Republican, who are you going to vote for in the following two-way election: a fascist or a liberal?

If you're a Democrat, who are you going to vote for in the following two-way election: a conservative or a socialist?

Then there's me, the independent, that's just waiting for the whole thing to inevitably blow up some day, as it will, cause most Republicans and Democrats are f***ing morons.



[Edited on April 18, 2008 at 9:16 AM. Reason : /]

4/18/2008 9:09:49 AM

gg republican18

good blog

4/18/2008 9:59:02 AM

I like Republican18, he seems like a cool guy (even though he's a cop) - but I don't agree with most of what he posts.

GrumpyGOP on the other hand, has been one of my favorite wolfwebbers for quite some time now. I don't agree with all that he posts, but at least he always makes sense.

And the motherfucker is e-hilarious

4/18/2008 10:25:32 AM

Going back to some of the rest of them...

Quote :

"The same kids that smoke pot, protest in front of the campus student union and bitch about the police giving them a ticket are the ones who would love to see a socialist state."

I do or have done all three of these things. God damn it, now I'm going to have to re-register to vote as a socialist, but it'll be too late for me to vote in the socialist primaries.

Quote :

"How is it that a liberal can bemoan the patriot act and the false belief that George Bush is somehow an Orwellian big brother, while at the same time preaching and working towards a system of government that grants the federal government greater and greater power over our daily lives."

One is inclined to note the rather substantial difference between the following forms of government intervention in our lives:

1) Free healthcare for everybody
2) Suspension of habeas corpus by way of an open-ended trip to a sprawling prison complex in Guantanamo Bay

Now, you could make the case that making people more dependent on the government is very dangerous, and then your blog would make slightly more sense. But you don't do that, so it doesn't.

Quote :

"It’s the same government that can’t maintain a budget, can’t spend money efficiently and can’t stop corruption, yet the liberals want to entrust them with more power, regulation and control."

I can change about two words in that and describe Enron or about a dozen other corporations perfectly, while also covering the role that decreased regulation played in their fiascoes.

Quote :

"are the very same people that desire a government and a state that has historically deprived their people of such freedoms and have oppressed the people terribly. Stalinist Russia, North Korea, North Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge, Cuba, Hugo’s Venezuela"

The United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Canada . . . you're right, man, socialism is a veritable who's-who of unspeakable oppression. You'll recall all those UN aid workers we're always sending to Stockholm.

Quote :

"The same kid who has a “Free Tibet” poster in his dorm or on his car is the one who thinks socialism is a good thing."

How in the sweet blue fuck does this make any sense? A nominally communist country rules Tibet. So logically a person who wants to see Tibet liberated from the same is a socialist.

Quote :

"Anyone remember Tiananmen Square?"

Yes. I also remember pretty much the entire southern United States during the fifties and sixties. Do you think it was socialist provocateurs or right-wing cops who were turning attack dogs loose on the black people?

Quote :

"The three types are: the hippies, the elitists and the ignorant masses."

This statement is -- without doubt -- the dumbest thing I have read in 2008.

Someone may come along and top it, but they will be going up against steep competition. For now, anyway, you get to wear the crown.

Here, I'll try to take it from you:

"To me, the three types of conservative are: the bigot, the corrupt CEO, and trailer park inhabitants."

Nah, it just doesn't have the same cachet...

Let me ask, just out of curiosity, what FDR was?

Quote :

"Sure they tend to be educated, with their liberal arts degrees, but they are too stupid to see into the face of history."

"Their liberal arts degrees?" I'll even ignore most of the stupid there and go straight to the point of mentioning that there are a number of "hippies" on this very board who graduated with engineering degrees of various kinds.

Quote :

"The final type is the elitists. These people include the Ivy League educated, the upper class snobs, and the limousine and Hollywood liberals. They are the Barack Obama liberals. In secret they scorn the values of patriotic, religious, blue collared Americans, while at the same time preying upon them for votes. They either feel that the masses are either too stupid or are too pitiful to make it on their own and therefore they need them as their liberal overlords. The elitists believe that only they should be allowed to make money, and they posses a “do as I say not as I do attitude”. They believe that they can spend your money better than you can, while at the same time lining their own pockets. These liberals only desire power and control over you, the ignorant masses."

Virtually every word applies perfectly to a comparable class of well-educated and wealthy conservatives.

4/18/2008 3:03:55 PM

Quote :

"GrumpyGOP on the other hand, has been one of my favorite wolfwebbers for quite some time now"

4/18/2008 3:08:05 PM

Quote :

"Now I will be the first to admit that I have my issues with things such as the patriot act, the presidency of George W. Bush and the current Republican Party, but....."

Then don't stubbornly align yourself with either party - they both suck. To me, this statement is in the same vein as "I'm not racist, but...." You must not have too many issues with Bush if you're more concerned with the "liberals" you described than with the Shrub's arrogant and largely unchecked flaunting of the Constitution.

Quote :

"Then there's me, the independent, that's just waiting for the whole thing to inevitably blow up some day, as it I hope it will"

4/18/2008 6:15:21 PM

I am torn, from time to time, between acknowledging any show of support and disregarding it entirely to seem aloof from the whims of the wolfweb. I tend towards the position of being grateful. Though it is not always apparent, I do try to be reasonable enough.

Soon, incidentally, McDanger and I will have a blog up and running that I will link to in hopes of promoting further discussion still.

4/19/2008 6:45:02 AM

^
I'll be looking forward to the GrumpyBlog!

4/19/2008 11:03:03 AM

id change my screen name to libertarian18 if i could

4/19/2008 7:17:54 PM