|
|
Post by Stonewall on Oct 23, 2003 9:19:59 GMT -5
Has anybody else noted the increasing trend of liberals to just fly off the hinge and say things that blatantly go against their doctrine of tolerance? One could give numerous examples (like calling Rush a "big, fat idiot") but it seems to shine most brightly when the subject is our beloved president. Ted Kennnedy's remarks of a month ago were so full of intolerance it would make a Klan member blush. He implied bad things about the state of Texas, attacked Bush's policy in a most un-intelligent and inflammatory way, and generally made an ass out of himself (an art he's perfected over the past forty years.) And he was lauded as a hero for doing so. I can't understand why more people don't pick up on the fact that the liberal doctrine of tolerance only applies to other liberals. Funny how this doctrine applies to Muslims and war protestors but not to our Commander in Chief or his soldiers in the field.
|
|
|
|
Post by lilolme on Oct 23, 2003 16:46:30 GMT -5
I noticed this too.
Liberals seem more emotional and more easily offended.
|
|
|
|
Post by ItWillNeverWork on Oct 23, 2003 18:06:36 GMT -5
You get em on all sides of the spectrum. Left, right, middle, up or down immature name-calling will always exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by lilolme on Oct 23, 2003 18:52:29 GMT -5
Yep, that's true. Liberals in general seem more easily provoked, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walter on Oct 24, 2003 14:15:06 GMT -5
I agree. One of our local PBS stations here in LA, KPFK, while supported in part by tax dollars, is an ultra left wing station.
An interesting aspect of that station is that they have been held in contempt for ignoring a court ordered restructuring of their Board of Directors, now get this, to achieve diversity!
They refuse to acknowledge that tiny legal issue, but are now in their beg-a-thon appeal to "keep free speech alive and well in Los Angeles." Most of the money they spend is on defending the litigation.
When a caller (yes they brave a call in format very late at night on weekends) called in during a discussion about the exclusion of minorities in the "Bush Regime," the caller asked why the station won't discuss KPFK's issue about the court ordered diversity. The host virtually yelled at him as being a Right Wing plant and scolded him for lying to the screener.
What I find interesting is that most PBS stations (we have 3 here in Southern California) have "political analysis" programs (that means opinions are the subject, not objectivity) but virtually no call in formats at all. They are all pre-orchestrated points of view.
Contrast that with the, so called, "right wing" talk shows on commercial stations (that means they pay, not live off of tax dollars) where the bulk of the shows permit opinion calls from listeners.
Golly gee. I wonder:
1. Why, if the left is so tolerant, they won't openly discuss their points of view in a forum?
2. Why it's always intolerant to contradict a left point of view?
3. Why the "intolerant" right tolerates criticism and honest debate?
Makes you think, doesn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by ItWillNeverWork on Oct 24, 2003 19:45:30 GMT -5
I don't go along with this one bit. I'm sure I could find just as many right wing stations that act in similar ways. If you don't notice them it is because you are not looking for them. Look hard enough and you'll always notice somthing that reafirms your current point of view.
I suppose the trick is to try and remain impartial and skeptical when viewing/listening/reading the media, I attempt to myself but only being human don't always succeed. But believe me there ARE just as many ignorant right wing loons as there are left wing ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 24, 2003 20:02:50 GMT -5
This is hipocrisy. First you start out saying that liberals are intolerant. I'm not qualified to speak on behalf of liberals, but I'm very tolerant and also very left. After calling liberals intolerant you than proceed to generalize muslims. Despite what some may think not all muslims are terrorists, in fact islam is against terrorism. You than proceed to say that soldiers lives are more valuable than muslims and activists, showing your true colors. No human life is worth more than another.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stonewall on Oct 27, 2003 15:14:07 GMT -5
" After calling liberals intolerant you than proceed to generalize muslims. Despite what some may think not all muslims are terrorists, in fact islam is against terrorism. You than proceed to say that soldiers lives are more valuable than muslims and activists, showing your true colors. No human life is worth more than another."
Okay, first of all, what in the world are you talking about? I never made any statements as to who is or is not more valuable. That's putting words in my mouth. I never even said anything about Muslims except that they can seemingly do no wrong in the eyes of liberals like yourself. I also never said anything about the worth of anyones life. The post is there to read for yourself -- where do I say this? Was it even my post you were reading? I think you were injecting your own preconceived notions about how conservatives think into what I wrote. And that, my friend, is being intolerant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis on Oct 27, 2003 20:58:19 GMT -5
Hmmmmmm, rereading your statement I see your point. I humbly admit that I was incorrect. However I still believe that my views are more tolerant than that of others.
|
|
|
|
Post by quinwound on Oct 27, 2003 21:43:11 GMT -5
I have noticed this a little bit. The thing is that most people want to put others down. Some "Liberals" (I dislike the stereotyping that goes with this word, the same with conservative) put down conservatives for not being tolerant.
I try not to do this. Last year while organizing a protest, I set up an area not too far away for people that opposed my views.
I am very strongly opposed censorship, oppression of ideas, etc. I may oppose your ideas, but I will fight for your right to have and express them.
|
|
|
|
Post by vito on Nov 12, 2003 0:43:11 GMT -5
Where did this idea come from that the notion of "tolerance" means that we liberals should simply nod and smile meekly at whatever anyone says? Like "oh, Georgie, you think we should nuke mexico to prevent illegal aliens? well, that's a very interesting idea, and your ideas are just as good as anyone else's. " BS to that! Tolerance means not discriminating against people of different creeds or races in employment, housing, education, etc. It doesn't mean we can't criticize, even in vehement terms, politicians and political ideas we disagree with. There's nothing new about this. One of my favorite possessions in my misspent youth was a "no brain, no pain" T-shirt which had R. Reagan's face with bozo-the-clown hair. I think it's hilarious how sensitive right-wingers are these days to criticism! After fifteen years of Limbaugh and eight years of slinging every possible kind of mud at Bill Clinton, they think their own boys should get a free pass? Think again!  |
|
|
|
Post by MO on Nov 12, 2003 2:12:39 GMT -5
Liberal "tolerance" has brought free speech to its knees. They have given us "hate speech" and "political correctness." Both designed to silence people and dismantle the first amendment.
Like he would say something like that! If he had the political, testicular fortitude to get tough on illegal aliens I'd have more respect for him. But, hey, just my opinion! At least I have enough respect for Mexico to capitalize it!
|
|
|
|
Post by vito on Nov 12, 2003 9:29:53 GMT -5
"At least I have enough respect for Mexico to capitalize it!"
Ow! What's this? A spelling flame? Help! I'm being "censored" by the first-amendment-hating "grammatical correctness" police!!
So you'll capitalize Mexico but would also support a president who wants to nuke it. Some respect!
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Nov 12, 2003 11:07:16 GMT -5
I didn't correct your spelling. I'm actually surprised you capitalize the first letter in a sentence. It's a documented fact that liberals often have shift key failure. Tony Snow was talking about it over the weekend. President Bush doesn't condone nuking Mexico, and neither do I, so don't put words in my mouth. This is a privately owned message board. The first amendment doesn't apply, here.  |
|
|
|
Post by guestvito on Nov 12, 2003 13:53:02 GMT -5
Oh, so sorry, it was a typing lame not a spelling lame.  I think it's comical that you took my crack about "first-amendment-hating grammatical correctness police" seriously enough to threaten to kick me off the board. Well go ahead "host dog" show us all how open you are to hearing contrary views. How thin-skinned you all are becoming! It's supposed to be left wingers that have no sense of humor? And maybe you didn't mean to imply that you support bush's proposal to nuke Mexico, but you certainly walked right into that one. Maybe you should have someone read your posts before you post them if it bothers you when people take what you say literally. Anyhow, to get back to the issue, your posts are good evidence for the point I was making. |
|
