Things that bother me about liberals

Not in theory but actual experiences

Published on August 5, 2007 By Draginol In Politics

Whether it be talking with friends, relatives, or just casual acquaintences, if the subject of politics comes up, I have noticed very specific behavior patterns between those who tend to be left of center politically versus those who are right of center.

There are plenty of things that annoy me about political conservatives too but not as consistently as "regular" people who are politically left. The list below is not a list of annoyances of politicans or public figures but rather traits of left of center people I have met in real life that seems to come up over and over.

So here's my list of things that bother me about dealing with political leftists:

Choose their positions based on emotion and passion rather than through research or investigation
Rarely look up for themselves the underlying facts on a given issue but rather rely on "trusted" advisors or editorials
Are very intolerant of views that do not match theirs. I don't think I've ever seen a conservative say "I don't want to hear anymore, let's talk about something else". by contrast, over and over, liberals will (at best) ask you to change the subject because they don't want to hear other points of view or (at worst) try to bully you from giving an opposing point of view.
Act as if their positions have some sort of moral high ground simply because their positions are based on "good intentions".
Similar to #4 -- take the view that their position is the "civilized" or "moderate" point of view. And that other points of view are simply barbaric "Of course guns should be outlawed" or "You didn't vote for Kerry? You seem like such a smart guy."
Have no knowledge of the tax system even as they loudly advocate higher taxes on "the rich". There's nothing quite like seeing a 3rd grade teacher espousing how the rich pay hardly anything in taxes even as they are talking to someone they know pays immense amounts of taxes (because I usually make sure to correct this falacy). And I usually get "Then you need to get a better accountant" as if they have any concept of the tax structure. Oh yes, I'll just use the magic loopholes that liberals are so certain exist and avoid taxes...
Think that feeling strongly about something counts more than actually doing something. My $1k contribution to the Cancer Society isn't as significant as someone who did a "Cancer walk" and got $315 in donations apparently. And btw, it's nice to do a cancer walk, it's even nicer to donate money yourself. Walking, chanting, whatever may make you feel but but it does nothing. It's the people donating to the cause materially that are actually making a material difference.
Think that witty sarcasm is a substitute for a coherent argument for their position. How many times have you made a point only to have a left winger try to dismiss it with a one-line sarcasm "Of course we armed Osama, I guess we got what we paid for.." That's a non sequitor and stupid to foot. But knowing little irrelevant pseudo-factoids is not a substitute for knowledge on the actual issue. It really comes to a head if Iraq comes up. Most anti-Iraq "war" advocates can't put together a coherent argument against it.
Massively inconsistent, simple minded positions. There's nothing quite like having a friend in Southern California say "Wars never solved anything". Really? You plan to argue that southern California should go back to Mexico? Because there was one war (US/Mexican) that most definitively and materially solved a particular question. Not to mention the Civil War and slavery, World War I, World War II, Korea, and Gulf War I. Or some middle class person living in a house in Florida that they inherited from their father arguing for higher estate taxes (why wait? why not hand your house to the government right now?). Or my favorite "There's no excuse for anyone to go hungry in this country." as an argument for more welfare. I agree there's no excuse, only a total dumbass could go hungry in this country. Welfare ain't gonna fix that.
Problems are always to be solved by someone else. To left wingers, being compassionate seems to mean being intellectually concerned about people but not wanting to actually do anything. My uncle, a conservative, drove down to Louisiana as part of his church group to repair people's houses. Meanwhile, not a single liberal I know has volunteered for anything but they sure have argued for more government spending on Katrina relief -- which is easy for them, I end up paying for it.
Believe in equality unless equality is inconvenient. I try not to flaunt my material success but at the same time, I am proud of what my family has achieved. My wife and I started with nothing (and btw, yes you can live on minium wage -- I did). But if I object to paying more in taxes, I am called greedy by some of my liberal friends. If I ask if they want to compare how much they donated to charity last year (not taxes, charity) they always come back with the "well you have more to give" argument. So what? And I've even tried to do the "Okay, then as a percentage of our income comparison" I still get the "we don't have as much excess money to give as you do" argument. And on taxes, even though I use the same roads, schools, police, etc. and pay literally over 50X more in taxes than most people and support progressive taxation, I still get implied arguments that I don't want to pay my fair share if I object to paying even more in taxes.
Obsess on diversity of skin color instead of diversity of ideas. What is it with the left and their obession with skin color? Yet, as I mentioned earlier, liberals are incredibly intolerant of other ideas. They want to live in an echo chamber. Most conservatives I know enjoy a good intelligent discussion. Most liberals get angry and frustrated with people who dare to have different (or incorrect) opinions. I have one friend named Chris who is liberal who is the exception to this (so if he's reading, kudos to him) who will intelligently and thoughtfully discuss issues without getting angry. I can't think of any liberal friend or relative who doesn't get angry and frustrated if confronted with opinons that don't match theirs.

Like I said, these are observations on public speakers. These are observations on friends, family, acquaintences that I meet and talk to. I am often almost made to feel like I should be ashamed for having conservative..uncivilized view points. If only I were as enlightened like them and used my heart more I would be ready to be welcomed into their civilized society.

Comments (Page 2)

Jythier

on Aug 06, 2007

The EIC is only for those who EARNED income. If you have not worked, you do not get it, period. Welfare does NOT count. Straight from the IRS website.

Jythier

on Aug 06, 2007

"Earned income does not include all of the following types of income:

Investment Income
Taxable refunds
Alimony received
Unemployment compensation
Pay received as an inmate in a penal institution
Retirement income
Child support
Money or property that was inherited, willed to you, or received as a gift
Life insurance proceeds received because of a person's death
Section 8 Housing Allowance
Food Stamps
TANF and other welfare benefits"

CharlesCS

on Aug 06, 2007

(Sorry this is so long, wanted to respond to each of Draginol’s points)

What an interesting article. It’s even more ironic that while I consider myself a conservative (even though many think I should be liberal due to my low income level) some of these things on this list can actually describe me somewhat.

Choose their positions based on emotion and passion rather than through research or investigation

I do use my emotions a lot in some of my positions but they are also based on what I know and understand. But many here did point out a truth about me on how I was making uneducated replies and that has made me change my way of expressing myself by making sure I know what I’m saying before I say it.
I have to agree, I too have met many Liberals (I live in West Palm Beach, FL) who are this way, too many if you ask me.

Rarely look up for themselves the underlying facts on a given issue but rather rely on "trusted" advisors or editorials

As I said above this pretty much described my way of blogging before. Not anymore.

Are very intolerant of views that do not match theirs. I don't think I've ever seen a conservative say "I don't want to hear anymore, let's talk about something else". by contrast, over and over, liberals will (at best) ask you to change the subject because they don't want to hear other points of view or (at worst) try to bully you from giving an opposing point of view.

Funny how that’s exactly what goes on on this site day in and day out. All I look for is a decent debate that will yield an idea of what people think about this country and how we can all find some middle ground that can benefit everyone. Instead all I see is “my way or the highway” attitudes (from both sides most of the time) and “you’re just an idiot” arguments that even I can’t avoid. While I try to not get personal and insulting with most here there are 1 maybe more who I just can’t help but using the word idiot on my first reply, I need not to mention names to point them out.

I read, I listen and I give them the benefit of the doubt. When I reply I usually do it by referring to how I see it different, not necessarily saying they are wrong, but God forbid that’s how I come off. It’s usually an insult or a backlash that follows instead of a decent rebuttle.

Act as if their positions have some sort of moral high ground simply because their positions are based on "good intentions".

And here I thought everyone’s ideas on how to make this country better were based on good intentions. I guess this means that no one else’s positions but theirs count because there is just no other way to have good intentions other than thinking as a Liberal. I must really hate my country if I’m a Conservative because all I want is to do it harm with all my bad intentions. But then again they say some of the worst things in life were done with good intentions. Maybe we have the right idea then.

Similar to #4 -- take the view that their position is the "civilized" or "moderate" point of view. And that other points of view are simply barbaric "Of course guns should be outlawed" or "You didn't vote for Kerry? You seem like such a smart guy."

As I pointed out in my first paragraph and the one before this, I must be an idiot for being Conservative since I would have voted for Bush if I was interested in it and my ideals are without “good intentions” or “barbaric”.

Have no knowledge of the tax system even as they loudly advocate higher taxes on "the rich". There's nothing quite like seeing a 3rd grade teacher espousing how the rich pay hardly anything in taxes even as they are talking to someone they know pays immense amounts of taxes (because I usually make sure to correct this falacy). And I usually get "Then you need to get a better accountant" as if they have any concept of the tax structure. Oh yes, I'll just use the magic loopholes that liberals are so certain exist and avoid taxes...

I wouldn’t say everyone here is ignorant to this; I for one am but I understand it a bit when someone writes an article on their position on taxes. But I believe they do tend to scream things as if they know exactly what they are talking about but when you point out a flaw in their argument they quickly get defensive and start pointing out all the bad stuff our Party has done as if it negates the downside of their argument. In other words trying to say “you shouldn’t talk” as if we didn’t have the right to point out an error just because we may have done one before.

Think that feeling strongly about something counts more than actually doing something. My $1k contribution to the Cancer Society isn't as significant as someone who did a "Cancer walk" and got $315 in donations apparently. And btw, it's nice to do a cancer walk, it's even nicer to donate money yourself. Walking, chanting, whatever may make you feel but but it does nothing. It's the people donating to the cause materially that are actually making a material difference

I’ll admit I am not in a position where I can give without hurting myself financially in the process but I do give when I can. I feel it helps more and feels better if it came from my pocket than from someone else’s while I don’t do anything except ask them for it. I wish I could do more, I do what I can but at least I do something about it. I am not afraid to point out problems and do something about it as oppose to others who try to ignore it or downplay it so as not to be seen as racist, hypocrite or cheap. But I can’t deny wanting to ignore them considering how ungrateful some people are and how painful it can be to be a nice person. Nothing like offering to help someone do their job like cleaning an oil spill only to be insulted for not trying to do something about it myself before.

Think that witty sarcasm is a substitute for a coherent argument for their position. How many times have you made a point only to have a left winger try to dismiss it with a one-line sarcasm "Of course we armed Osama, I guess we got what we paid for.." That's a non sequitor and stupid to foot. But knowing little irrelevant pseudo-factoids is not a substitute for knowledge on the actual issue. It really comes to a head if Iraq comes up. Most anti-Iraq "war" advocates can't put together a coherent argument against it

Witty is another term for smarts around this site. If you can outwit someone here you can be seen as a genius. At least that’s what I get from some of those who use wits as most of the meat in their “debate”. I like the ones who use your words and make them look like you don’t know how to use them like when I said we should make movies about all past Presidents to show how screwed up our Gov’t is regardless which Party is in charge and someone who will remain nameless for now made it seem as if I was trying to say “use my time machine to video tape past Presidents and make a movie out of it”.

Massively inconsistent, simple minded positions. There's nothing quite like having a friend in Southern California say "Wars never solved anything". Really? You plan to argue that southern California should go back to Mexico? Because there was one war (US/Mexican) that most definitively and materially solved a particular question. Not to mention the Civil War and slavery, World War I, World War II, Korea, and Gulf War I. Or some middle class person living in a house in Florida that they inherited from their father arguing for higher estate taxes (why wait? why not hand your house to the government right now?). Or my favorite "There's no excuse for anyone to go hungry in this country." as an argument for more welfare. I agree there's no excuse, only a total dumbass could go hungry in this country. Welfare ain't gonna fix that.

I think when they say “doesn’t solve anything” I believe “anything” refers to we still go to war instead of talking (diplomacy). Diplomacy to me is a joke, kids don’t kick and scream because they are looking for compromise, they get what they want, even if it’s not what they were crying for in the first place. In the end some parents give in. The same goes for those who we usually end up at war with, they are not willing to fight and die for compromise, they want what they want and are willing to die for it. In the end the one with the least will power will have to give up something. Compromise? I don’t think so, they didn’t want to give it in the first place. Compromise only works if both sides are willing to give something will getting something in return, good for both, not just one.

Problems are always to be solved by someone else. To left wingers, being compassionate seems to mean being intellectually concerned about people but not wanting to actually do anything. My uncle, a conservative, drove down to Louisiana as part of his church group to repair people's houses. Meanwhile, not a single liberal I know has volunteered for anything but they sure have argued for more government spending on Katrina relief -- which is easy for them, I end up paying for it

Day in and day out I constantly argue how some (if not most) people just refuse to do anything themselves (unless it’s easy and makes a lot of money in one shot). Especially when the concept of someone else doing it for you exist such as Gov’t programs that pay your bills, put food on the table and even give you an education, all without you having to life a finger except to sign your name a few times and to pull out your ID to cash the check, unless you have direct deposit. I find it amazing how people seem to have the energy to shop at the supermarket or any other store, carry the food or other items such as electronics home, cook it or install it yet they refuse to work for it. Or even funnier are those who do work under the table jobs while collecting money from the Gov’t so they can get those other extras such as Big screen TVs, a Lexus, Playstation 3’s, etc. And God forbid some of them will actually give from their own pockets to help those people they scream need more money.
I’m not a big fan of giving to help these people who won’t (see how I said won’t not can’t) help themselves. My taxes should not go to those who milk the system. Throwing more money at it only increases the abuse of it.

Believe in equality unless equality is inconvenient. I try not to flaunt my material success but at the same time, I am proud of what my family has achieved. My wife and I started with nothing (and btw, yes you can live on minium wage -- I did). But if I object to paying more in taxes, I am called greedy by some of my liberal friends. If I ask if they want to compare how much they donated to charity last year (not taxes, charity) they always come back with the "well you have more to give" argument. So what? And I've even tried to do the "Okay, then as a percentage of our income comparison" I still get the "we don't have as much excess money to give as you do" argument. And on taxes, even though I use the same roads, schools, police, etc. and pay literally over 50X more in taxes than most people and support progressive taxation, I still get implied arguments that I don't want to pay my fair share if I object to paying even more in taxes

Equality? That’s rich (no pun intended). How can there be equality when we have people who wanna work to make a living and then there are those who want a living from those who work. So if Joe works 40 hours a week to make $1000 after taxes we should give Jim who doesn’t have a job because he can’t find one a tax-free $1000 check so we can all be equal? Please, if anything I don’t want anything the Gov’t has to offer because it becomes a hassle just to get it. Nothing like having to stand in 6 hour lines just to apply for food stamps so that the Gov’t employee can treat you like you life is in their hands and you are some kind of a criminals or lazy bastard if you need help from the Gov’t when you can probably get a job. I should know, I have tried it all. Not to mention the hassle once you have it to use it. People always verifying you are who you are, that the paperwork is legit, that it’s still active. It plain sucks, I would rather work and pay out of my pocket than have to go thru the grueling process of the paperwork.

Obsess on diversity of skin color instead of diversity of ideas. What is it with the left and their obession with skin color? Yet, as I mentioned earlier, liberals are incredibly intolerant of other ideas. They want to live in an echo chamber. Most conservatives I know enjoy a good intelligent discussion. Most liberals get angry and frustrated with people who dare to have different (or incorrect) opinions. I have one friend named Chris who is liberal who is the exception to this (so if he's reading, kudos to him) who will intelligently and thoughtfully discuss issues without getting angry. I can't think of any liberal friend or relative who doesn't get angry and frustrated if confronted with opinons that don't match theirs

I find it interesting to see so many black people (that I know) who are Liberals simply because Conservatives use to be or were considered racist and bigots back then. Because they believe that Liberals and/or Democrats are for the poor people. That with them they will probably never have to work again. At least that’s what I get when I talk to some of them and happen to get their political opinions on stuff. I’m Conservative and I’m not a racist. I believe I have part African in my blood since at one time there were black slaves in Puerto Rico and my Grandfather had many features seen in black people. I wouldn’t have minds dating girls of any race; I love variety (not intended as it sounds). I have friends of many races and so do my kids. My wife’s 2 best friends are black and my wife is Hispanic. My father in law is about as black as one can get being Puerto Rican. I see people. Not color. I think anyone is capable of reaching incredible strides if given the chances. I don’t think anyone deserves to get a bump simply because they are Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. They deserve it by earning it. If we need laws that will give a Hispanic of low grades a boost into a great college while leaving out the kid with all A’s because he’s white only means that this country is worse than we wanna see it that we need a law to contradict racism.

Draginol

on Aug 06, 2007

We finally fixed the quoting as you may notice.

Gideon MacLeish

on Aug 06, 2007

Nope, not at all, if you have children and fall below a certain income level, you can claim EIC whether you actually worked outside the home or not.

A childless person has to work to claim it, though.

Actually, you do have to have earned income to claim it, LW. I'm not sure whether entitlements count, but if you have zero earned income, you get squat. We found this out the hard way the year before last when the stupid H&R Block accountant deducted all of my mileage and vehicle expenses, leaving us with a rather paltry sum after all of the deductions were realized. This knocked out "refund" down significantly. I would have had it re-done, but we were already getting back more than we paid for the year, so I wasn't going to be an ass about it.

But we didn't have H&R Block do our returns this year.

Draginol

on Aug 06, 2007

I am not talking about people being intractible in their points of view. I am talking about people becoming physically angry because someone else doesn't share their philosophy.

Good intentions are the first step to a solution. They are not the ends unto themselves. One cannot say "Let's build a bridge out of cotton so that it's softer" and argue they have the moral high ground simply because they have good intentions.

I want to eliminate all long-term welfare because I think it has the best chance at decreasing overall poverty. Someone else who says that everyone should automatically get $50,000 from the government does not have the moral high ground simply because they think their intentions are good.

Good intentions do not give one a moral high ground. Good results do.

Another item I would add is that liberals worry far too much about "fairness". You can almost immediately spot a liberal if their comments or posts or speech are peppered with "fairness". Liberals seem to be much more comfortable with indefinable concepts like "fairness" (who defines what's fair -- them -- very convenient!).

CharlesCS

on Aug 06, 2007

We're not talking about people on the Internet. We're talking about people we meet in real life. In real life, overwhelmingly in my experience, it's people who hold liberal values who simply do not want to hear opposing points of view. They will simply say "I don't want to hear anymore." I am not talking about people being intractible in their points of view. I am talking about people becoming physically angry because someone else doesn't share their philosophy.

You're right. I do however work with a Liberal guy (it's just us 2 down in the basement, yet there's actually a basement here in Florida) who does get angry often when I express my point of view. Because of company policy I try to avoid politics as often as I can, but with the radio on AM stations most of the time (FM stations are not so great around here, too many commercials) we listen to a lot of talk radio and mostly politics, so it can be hard at times to avoid it. He is passionate about disliking Bush, but is willing to admit not everything is his fault. But he's still a bit loony.

That is so true ( and no I am not kissing butt here people).

If anyone knows about welfare its me, I spent many of my young years being the translator to many of my family members who did not speak English while applying for welfare. I was only about 7 years old and had no clue what was all this about. To be honest I want there to be some kind of welfare that will get people out of poverty and into the working world and help them learn to sustain themselves and get off the welfare almost as fast as they got on it. I have found myself in really hard times and have had many family members constantly tell me to get Gov't help. The few times I tried it was a horrible process, seems almost as bad as getting into this country legally even though it's obviously not. I chose to find a job and earn my living than have to deal with the Gov't.

terpfan1980

on Aug 06, 2007

Excellent article Draginol. I think you summarized the issues with liberals pretty well. Sadly many of them will never learn from your list, though I wish that all would at least read it and recognize how much of themselves show up there.

CharlesCS

on Aug 07, 2007

The part that I really liked are those who claim to know many conservatives that match this list.

Dr Guy

on Aug 07, 2007

We're not talking about people on the Internet.

I think that is a key distinction here at JU, but not everywhere on the Internet. I doubt that this disclaimer would apply to du.org, moveon.org, The Daily Kos, or Puffington Host.

Draginol

on Aug 07, 2007

I think that is a key distinction here at JU, but not everywhere on the Internet. I doubt that this disclaimer would apply to du.org, moveon.org, The Daily Kos, or Puffington Host.

Perhaps. But I wanted to draw the distinction between people who are casually talking about politics versus people who go on-line specifically to talk about politics.

There's a big difference between Aunt Sally starting talk about how the rich are not taxed enough at a family get together and people who are out on the net seeking debate on the topics.

The casually political liberals are the ones who bring up politics at a social occasion.

Jewbu

on Aug 07, 2007

Before this, she worked as a doctoral student in a University Alzheimer's lab (a disorder I am stricken with).

Bummer. Sorry to hear it, Sodaiho.

LW, No worries. I have something associated with early adult TBI (from Vietnam) called prematurely aging brain syndrome. It mimics AD. I take the same drugs used for it and Parkinson's Disease. Other than being a bit of a drag on my energy level, the results are wonderful. My memory loss has slowed and the loss of motor skills has also slowed, but not quite as much as I would like.

As a Zen Buddhist facing the extinction of self I see this as quite ironic

Oh well, what's a monk to do?

See ya.

Jewbu

on Aug 08, 2007

Good intentions do not give one a moral high ground. Good results do.
Another item I would add is that liberals worry far too much about "fairness". You can almost immediately spot a liberal if their comments or posts or speech are peppered with "fairness". Liberals seem to be much more comfortable with indefinable concepts like "fairness" (who defines what's fair -- them -- very convenient!).

Hello Draginol,

You pose an interesting juxtaposition here. Your line regarding intentions versus consequences puts you squarely on the consequentialist side of ethical inquiry, yet your comments regarding the "indefinable" concept of fairness would suggest you are far more an absolutist. How is this so?

Most moral concepts are very hard to define. Even conservative ethicists like Nozick have a difficult time operationalizing moral terms, relying on the creation of compenstory schemes to deal with his dislike of Rawls' Theory of Justice which bases itself on notions of fairness.

From my POV, intention is everything. There is no bad karma resulting from good intentions gone awry.But there is a ton of it, the other way around. The suggestion you makein the obverse that conservatives may not be comfortable with indefinables points to their most serious weakness. Indefinables are everywhere.

Be well.

danielost

on Aug 08, 2007

which is better everyone is the same.

or everyone has the same chance.

Jewbu

on Aug 08, 2007

You are repeating a common myth and I need to call you on it. Stem cell research is not banned, only federal monies to fund it. If it is so important and offers such incredible breakthroughs, why aren't more private investors/donors stepping up to the plate?

Things that make you go hmmmm.....

Gid, The NIH is a powerhouse for university-based research. It has been seriously hampered by our President's policy. Laboratories depend on federal dollars to keep their doors open. Private research corporations use the results of early research findings derived from NIH as well as many other publicly funded sources, but they are still private and not above fears of assault on their bottom lines. In truth we will lose our ranking in the scientific world as other countries eclipse us. To me this is part and parcel of the assault on education and science in the United States by anti-intellectuals. I think we look like idiots to the rest of the world. Oh well.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!