You want to bl me? Fine go right ahead. Typical liberal thinking though. I try and stick up for you when everyone is stomping "Lucas" in the mud. And I get bl'd.....oh well, I'm quite sure I'll survive. Consider it returned, "in spades"!

Stick up for me? Frankly, I don't remember you doing so. Perhaps my brain really is fried from finals...could you perhaps remind me where you've done so?

Still, it's fact, that i don't respond well to purposely rude (aka "asshole") i ndividuals. It's for the best.

Can YOU do the same? I highly doubt it.

I try my best, i'm not perfect.

Obtuse people like you, who simply brush most of us liberals off as mere flys. You really don't grasp the concept of liberalism, i dont mean "fanatic liberalism". I mean deep down, at it's base, at the core, liberalism. Rights, equal treatment, tolerance. Those are just three tenants of liberalism.

Since when is American liberalism tolerant? They're the ones who try to shut down other people's right to speak out. If you believe in tolerance -- real tolerance -- you should be a conservative.

I agree that liberals believe in equal treatment. Conservatives believe treatment should be based on merit. How we treat a terrorist vs. how we treat a police officer should be different. Liberals seem to be saying taht they should get equal treatment.

As for "rights", I'm not sure what you mean. It was the American right that freed the slaves, fought for women's suffrage, and killed segregation. Look at the opponents of rights historically and there's a (D) by their name.

The problem I have with your "beliefs", Lucas is that you claim high minded opinions but are quick to condemn others who don't share them.  There's nothing tolerant in your views.

The only ideal I've seen you uphold is that everyone should be treated equally regardless of what they've done.  Hence, your arguments almost always boil down to moral equivication. 

I don't see conservatism promoting the same? Conservatism, traditionalism...is what pushed the British empire, it is what kept people thinking that the earth was flat, that the earth was the center of the universe, etc...

Then you should, you know, pick up a history book.  American conservatives ARE the classic liberal.

Let's do a quick list here:

• Who supports bringing freedom to millions of Iraqis? Who opposes it?
• Republicans supported abolishing slavery, Democrats oppposed it
• Republicans supported Universal Suffrage, Democrats opposed it
• Republicans fought segregation, Democrats created it and served it
• Conservatives believe in free speech, Liberals shoot down speech they don't like as "racist" or "hateful" and work to prevent conservatives from speaking.
• Conservatives are the ones who research the new technologies, produce the new scientific discoveries.  Try to find a liberal in a lab.
• Conservatives are the ones who create opportunities for people -- despite having to work around poorly thought out liberal rules. Try to find a liberal at an Entrepreneur conference.
• Conservatives are the ones who provide the bulk of the charitable giving in this country, start charities, and give to the poor.  Try finding a liberal volunteering in a soup kitchen.
• Liberals are the ones who attack (physically) people on stage at universities for speaking on issues they don't approve of. Try to find a liberal who's been physically assaulted by a conservative.

Liberals will tolerate people having correct opinons. Liberals believe that rights should carry no responsibilities. Liberals believe in universal equal rights -- criminals and victims are equal in their minds.

You say that people don't know what liberals are. You are wrong. We know too well what liberals are. You simply have no idea what a conservative is (the bizarre earth is flat thing).

 

Granted, but can you really get over it? Can you set aside your bias and, truly, look at it from a neutral, or another pov? What I am trying to say, is that...your bias colors your views, which - if you continue to let it do so - you'll never understand anything from the left wing. You will never be able to tolerate them. You're pov is too biased, too slanted. Me, yes, I'm biased. I'd be lying if i said otherwise, but i actually try, i actually attempt to see things from other sides, and not just...assume, or the like.

I understand the left-wing a lot better than you do.  The reason I am so successful is because I *am* biased.

Biases are formed based on experience. 

A carpenter can look at a rotted piece of wood and know that that wood will probably give way. That is bias.

A doctor can feel swollen glands on a child and conclude that the child probably has a bacterial-based infection. That is bias.

A farmer can look at a horse and based on its movements tell whether it is sick or not. That is bias.

A soldier can look at a crowd and tell whether it's hostile or not and prepare for it. That is bias.

Bias is the indication of someone who is educated and experienced.

People who are unable or unwilling to generalize tend to be free from bias. But they are also free from being very productive.

Being biased doesn't mean one doesn't see things from other points of view.  The word you are looking for is called empathy. My job requires me to have a high degree of empathy. I understand other points of view. Empathy is unrelated to bias.

I fully understand the liberal point of view on any number of issues.  I understand the conservative point of view on issues I don't agree on.  I am pro-choice, for instance, on abortion.  But I fully understand the beliefs of people who are pro-life even though I am biased in favor of the pro-choice position. 

You  need to expand your thinking if you really believe that empathy is somehow tied in with bias.

Secondly, explain how using the media as a source even while believing that it is biased overall is hypocritical? Or do you just like using that word? You bash it, for being biased, etc... but you *still* use it. It's like, using something you prefer, even though you know it is useless.

My bike tends to pull a little bit to the left when I ride it. However, I still ride it. It is still a useful bike. I simply adjust my riding with its bias in mind.

I can complain that my bike tilts left when I ride and still use it. It simple requires me to compensate for it's bias.

News media are tools. You adjust to their biases as need be.  I read Al Franken books and I read Ann Coulter books. I am aware of their biases and simply compensate my thinking as I read them. It is a good way of learning other points of view.  One might argue taht someone who refuses to read thigns they don't agree with will have a poor understanding of other perspectives.

As for "rights", I'm not sure what you mean. It was the American right that freed the slaves, fought for women's suffrage, and killed segregation. Look at the opponents of rights historically and there's a (D) by their name.

Brad, just because there was an R beside their name, doesn't mean that they are conservatives.

If you look at history, during the civil wars...it was the party called the "radical republicans," who advocated rights for blacks, and wanted harsh punishment against the south for both seceding from the Union, and for the (wht they said) travesty against the blacks. (Albeit, possibly in order to garner votes...I'll talk about that later. See # 2) It was the party called the "democrats," who opposed it.

The REPS were largely in the north, and DEMS in the south. I believe the transition started during the reconstruction, if not before hand. The parties essentially flip-flopped (not unlike todays politicians ).

Those who were radical "republicans" before the CW, were now known as the Democrats, and vice versa.

Why? I don't know, but it is thought that the radical fringes of the parties gained enough power to bring about the change, and slowly but surely they shifted.

This was also the start of the growing gap between moderates and non moderates of both parties.

I mean, Andrew Jackson was an opponent of the radical fringe of the republican party, and was nearly impeached because of that. (Sound familiar?)

So, to bring what I said together...

Modern day republicans, were once known as "democrats." So to speak. They held a strong base in the south, which was traditional, etc...

Modern day democrats, were once known as radical "republicans." Their base was mostly in the north, and north east. (Sound familiar?)



#2 - It's believed that, in line with politics...that the radical fringe may have took their stance (against slavery) because they saw that they could, if successful, garner a lot of votes from the blacks. This would give them a better, if not an extremely better chance for power. So, they pursude it.

If you notice, modern day democrats have a very large base of....*drum rolls*...blacks.

See?

The only ideal I've seen you uphold is that everyone should be treated equally regardless of what they've done. Hence, your arguments almost always boil down to moral equivication.

Really, where, when, how?

Since when is American liberalism tolerant? They're the ones who try to shut down other people's right to speak out. If you believe in tolerance -- real tolerance -- you should be a conservative.

Funny, most of those who are intolerant of...gays, are conservative. Those who were intolerant of black rights, were conservative.

I admit that there are intolerant liberals, just as much as there are intolerant conservatives.

I don't they necessarily shout down one's right to speak out, but shout down what they see as hate, etc...

Also, I'd say they haven't matured enough to learn to express their dislike in a reasonable manner.

For the most part, I think that most of the so called"loony left," incorporates young, idealized, and often fanatical (not crazy) adults.

To borrow a quote, that was said in regards to something else, but is very apt with this:

"Ignorance is the number one problem. Education is of the essence." ~Hossam Ahmed (Retired US Air Force Colnel)

WWW Link

The problem I have with your "beliefs", Lucas is that you claim high minded opinions but are quick to condemn others who don't share them. There's nothing tolerant in your views.

I don't intend to comdemn, i intend to try to get folks to step back and question, self evaluate.

Bias is the indication of someone who is educated and experienced.

You can also be biased based on your raising, and be as dumb as a door knob. It doesn't bode well, but it is very possible.

Being biased doesn't mean one doesn't see things from other points of view. The word you are looking for is called empathy. My job requires me to have a high degree of empathy. I understand other points of view. Empathy is unrelated to bias.

Let me step back, and re-establish my point, because i think i've strayed.

Willfull bias,willfull/intentional ignorance...the kind that you have where a person doesn't (as you said),"...read things they don't agree with will have a poor understanding of other perspectives."

You need to expand your thinking if you really believe that empathy is somehow tied in with bias.

Ehhh, an example...my gf.

She defines herself as a "bleeding heart liberal." And well, I back that up 100%, cause she definantly is.

She would give the shirt off her back, to any needy child, anywhere.

She fits the definition to a point: "A democrat (doesn't abscribe to being democrat, and only chose it because you have to register to vote.) or political left-winger(2 different things) who tends to be subjective in their political views."

She's definantly subjective/biased, but only in, as the rest of the definition says:

"any person who thinks only about the benifit of individuals rather than society as a whole. In other words the kind of person who believes that we must not leave anyone behind, even if helping them would be a drag one the whole group. Someone who not only believes that, but will not waver on it no matter what, that is a bleeding heart-liberal."

She is biased, and very empathetic. (Heh, trust me...)

(cont...)

***


Now, myself...I am more of a moderate BHL. (I know, doesn't make sense) I am staunchly for:

"the benifit of individuals rather than society as a whole. In other words the kind of person who believes that we must not leave anyone behind, even if helping them would be a drag one the whole group."

...however, I am willing to seek alternate solutions. I guess you could say that I am a moderate bleeding heart liberal/reasonable bleeding heart liberal.

~Lucas

P.S. Sorry for the number of replies, it was the only way I could reply at all. Everytime I tried to post a long reply...everything would slow down, and 100% of the time I would end up getting messages like "server error," "server unavailable," etc...)

You want to bl me? Fine go right ahead. Typical liberal thinking though. I try and stick up for you when everyone is stomping "Lucas" in the mud. And I get bl'd.....oh well, I'm quite sure I'll survive. Consider it returned, "in spades"! Stick up for me? Frankly, I don't remember you doing so.

Then just maybe you should go back and read dharma and LW older threads!

Then just maybe you should go back and read dharma and LW older threads!

Okay, I will...

You can also be biased based on your raising, and be as dumb as a door knob. It doesn't bode well, but it is very possible.

There's a fine semantical line between bias and bigoted.

Regarding who freed the slaves:

Brad, just because there was an R beside their name, doesn't mean that they are conservatives.

Do me a favor: Read up on the abolitionist movement. Even a wikipedia or some other web source should be a good enough primer. Then tell me which political movement today you think it's most like?

To me, it's pretty clear cut: They're the same people who protest abortion. Eerily similar.

The problem with liberals and conservatives is that the literal meanings of the words no longer describe those who call themselves liberal and conservatives.

She defines herself as a "bleeding heart liberal." And well, I back that up 100%, cause she definantly is. She would give the shirt off her back, to any needy child, anywhere.

But statistically, liberals give far FAR FAR less to charity than conservatives even taking differences in income into consideration.

Maybe your girlfriend isa bleeding heart liberal, but the example you give doesn't make her liberals because the actual statistics don't back up the unearned generalization that liberals are more compassionate.

She is biased, and very empathetic. (Heh, trust me...)

Yes. that's my point. You can be biased and empathic.  You claimed earlier that being biased could prevent you from understanding other people's points of view. But the two are not related at all.