I'm just rambling here so if you're looking for a well written piece, you'll want to go elsewhere.  After 6 weeks of massive hours I'm spent..

It's not a good time to ideological. 

If you're a conservative, you're quickly discovering that victory in politics quickly corrupts.  Conservatives control the congress and the presidency only to have record deficits, sloppy governance, and cronyism. 

If you're an intelligent liberal, your ideology has largely been hijacked by very loud people who sound like they just came off their meds. 

It is kind of ironic that in the past few years conservatism, as a movement, has become more secular, while liberalism has become a secular religion unto itself.  Those who stray from orthodox liberalism are treated as heretics. I think this is one of the reasons why liberals seem much much more likely to attack Christians because they now subconsciously see it as a rival religion.

Personally, I tend to pick and choose pieces of different ideologies to create my own life philosophy. A philosophy that suits me based on my experiences.  I wouldn't be considered very conservative socially by most "real" conservatives.  I'm pro-choice. Pro-civil union for gays. Pro-higher taxes on the wealthy.  I'm not really a libertarian as I do believe in government regulation, the FDA, the FCC, the FTC, etc.  But since I don't follow liberal orthodoxy, I'm a "conservative".  And that's why Liberals are the minority because nowadays, it doesn't take much to be a conservative.  Believe in a reasonably free market? No soup for you.  Consider patriotism to be a good thing? You're off the liberal team. Think Kyoto is a bad idea? Pack your bags, righty.

The liberal religion, for lack of a better word, seems to have gone a long way towards making themselves a permanent minority.  The reason boils down to their religion being so fundamentalist.  Just as obnoxious Christians used to take the attitude "Sure, you can believe what you want, but don't blame me when you're burning in hell" liberal dogma goes something like this "Sure, you can believe what you want but you just prove you're not enlightened if you disagree with me."

I found this image on the net (from a Mac user which is unsurprising).  Pretty typical stuff. To be a conservative simply requires a frontal lobotomy.

And so it goes with most debates I get into with left of center people.  There's a smug undertone to the discussion in which my views are not being taken very seriously because it never occurs to them that any view other than theirs could have any merit.  My views are simply based on ignorance and base human desires (hate, greed, you name it). 

Liberals, would counter and say "Conservatives don't listen to opposing views either." Nonsense.  That's the basic disconnect between conservatism and today's liberalism.  Probably because conservatives believe in social Darwinism, capitalism, and the free market as a whole, bad ideas get jettisoned and good ideas take over. A belief that can't stand the test of the real world gets tossed out. Over time, the ideology gets sharper and sharper.  Liberals tend to have a lot less faith in competition of all sorts and perhaps that is why they tend to stick to beliefs that don't survive critical inspection.

As a result, over time, the conservative ideology has evolved and changed.  Consider today's conservative to one in 1972.  The typical conservative today is quite different from the ones of 1972.  The book "South Park Conservatives" is practically a case study on the phenomenon.   Liberalism, by contrast, remains almost completely unchanged other than changing the dates of predicted doom or whether it's global cooling vs. global warming.  A liberal demonstration today looks pretty much the same as it did back then. Everyone's a Nazi still (except for actual brutal fascist dictators with little mustaches) and big business is still the devil and good intentions still trump any concern over the logical result if their demands were met. It's about caring after all.  It's about fairness(TM) (whatever that means).

As liberals have lost ground, they have become even more shrill and intolerant and it shows.  Moreover, many liberals are poorly equipped to battle on anything resembling equal ground in the war of ideas. Liberals get into college which insulates them from the real world and provides them a sympathetic left-wing environment thanks to left-wing professors who never had to put their beliefs to the test outside academia, and as a result, liberals go out into the world without a good background in how to put forth a compelling argument to advocate their beliefs.

Liberal debating strategy ends up being either:

1. Duh. (to use Bakerstreet's quote). If you disagree with me you're stupid.
2. SHUT UP YOU RACIST NAZI!

Nearly every liberal debate on any site will devolve into that.  Either you're stupid or you're a racist nazi. It depends on who you're debating with and whether they are feeling cornered.

The "Duh" argument

Liberals who use the Duh argument usually rely heavily on wit and one-liners. John Stewart of the Daily Show is the poster child of this argument. "Many people disagree with Kyoto, such as President Bush.  In related news, Bush has proposed a mission to Mars in the hopes of helping speed up the timetable in which mankind can escape to a new planet to destroy."

Liberals are often very witty. But wit is no substitute for an argument.

Here's a typical "Duh" argument example:

Mary: "We only eat organic food, it's better for the environment and more healthy."

Bill: "Really? How?"

Mary: "Well, first, it doesn't use pesticide. I'm just not big on having poison on my food. I'm just weird that way. Second, they use natural fertilizer instead of chemicals. Got enough chemicals already, thank you."

Bill: "Why do you think that's better?"

Mary: "Duh. Pesticide. Poison. Poison = Bad for environment. And chemicals = bad. Hello?"

Bill: "I've never heard of anyone dying from pesticide. And they use pesticide so that insects and weeds won't destroy a lot of the crop so that they can produce more food on less land which is better for the enviroment. Secondly, the 'chemical' fertilizer they use is nitrogen which makes up 75% of our atmosphere. Natural fertilizer is literally poop.  Are you saying you'd rather eat poop than have trace amounts of pesticide on your food?"

Mary: "You just don't get it.  You sound like you've been brainwashed  by the agribusiness."

The "SHUT UP" argument

The Shut up argument can start out a lot like a Duh argument. It depends on the intelligence of the debater on how long they are able to "use their words". Eventually, many liberals will devolve into shouting and personal attacks. Either a demand for you to be quiet or an accusation that you're evil or racist or a comparison with Hitler or the Nazis (which is ironic since this breed of liberal is unknowingly imitating the tactics of the Nazi party during the 1930s -- another issue, this breed of liberal usually knows little on history).

Craig: "Bush and his cronies are once again stuffing the pockets of their rich friends while the poor are left to rot. What's next? Bush going to send his cronies to pick pocket the poor to give to their rich buddies?"

Angie: "Well technically the poor don't pay federal taxes and the government doesn't give rich their money, tax cuts mean that less of the income earned by rich people is taken by the government."

Craig: "The rich don't need that money! (getting louder) What about the poor mother with 3 children to feed? What about them??"

Angie: "Well, perhaps they should have considered their finances before having 3 children?"

Craig: "SHUT UP YOU RACIST NAZI!"

It's not both sides

Usually at this part of the discussion an intelligent liberal will try to argue that "both sides" have their crazies. And that is true. But numerically, it's incredibly one-sided (you don't usually find too many math majors who are liberals which I guess makes sense since statistics seem to be an anathema to them).  Cindy Sheehan who is detested on the right can give a speech uninterrupted but Ann Coulter and other conservatives have to worry about being assaulted on stage. Being able to give their speech is often difficult if not impossible because of left-wing loonies screaming  "SHUT UP YOU RACIST NAZI!"

You see it on JoeUser too.  there are right-wing boobs here on JoeUser.com.  But in terms of foaming at the mouth, red-eyed hatred, it's not even close which side is more represented.  It's not just here. Democratic Underground is a favorite whipping boy.  But there's really no right-wing equivalent.  The New Republic has some crazies, Democratic Underground IS crazy.

Many liberals are very intelligent and have many good points. But it's becoming increasingly rare to find even intelligent liberals who do more than simply complain about how bad a given policy is. Conservatives often seem more intent in actually finding a solution. It may not always be the best solution but at least they're trying. Liberals, even intelligent ones, will just poke holes in it without offering an alternative.  And the unintelligent ones will just shriek nonsense that I suspect even they don't think will be considered seriously.

And it's getting worse.  I'm not sure where things will end up.  The joke at our home is that it won't end in civil war because the right-wingers have all the guns.  But something is going to give in the next few years.  The left's shrillness from the extremes and complacent arrogance from its mainstream is causing it to lose more and more influence as the majority begins to find replacements to the institutions that those demographics have tended to control (media and academia). 

In the meantime, I'll just hope that I can debate with friends and strangers alike without them trying to patronize me or shout me down.  But I won't get my hopes up.