English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The reason I say this is if you look at the liberal culture, most are hippies from the "I'm stoned out of my head" 60's. And if they were born after the 60's it must be a birth defect from the years that their moms and dads were stoned constantly. I guess we should pity the younger generation since it wasn't their fault. What do you think?

2006-08-18 15:44:37 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

11 answers

This is your brain... This is a liberal brain on drugs. (sizzle..sizzle..)

If a liberal's brain is not on drugs, then it's dead.

2006-08-18 15:50:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

It depends on what you mean by "liberalism." I take it to mean that we should look an new answers to old questions when the old answers did not add up to effective solutions. I would cite the drug situation as an example. We are spending zillions onthe war on drugs, but other than putting a lot of people rightly behind bars, are we on the right track? I think it needs some open minded individuals to figure out what we need to do.

2006-08-18 15:57:03 · answer #2 · answered by Richard G 1 · 1 1

Your position on the liberal/conservative axis depends on your own perception of the boundary between "me and mine" versus "them".

At the extreme conservative end of the scale is the solipsist: Someone who doesn't believe that anyone outside themselves even exists. This can be philosphical or caused by mental illness.

A highly-consevative view is that only myself and my own immediate family are worthy of my consideration and support. Everybody else is an outsider, and I owe them nothing.

A moderately-conservative view is that people from my town are okay, but outsiders are less worthy of consideration. This is common among sports fans, since teams are almost always associated with one town.

A less conservative view is that all people of my race, my country, my gender, etc. are better than those who are not.

As the boundaries of the "in group" get larger, we call those positions more liberal.

A moderate liberal will consider all people of his country to be part of his group, and so they should all have equal treatment under the law, a minimum social support network, etc.

A more extreme liberal will consider all humans to be part of his group. This is where you get the conflict between labor unions (for citizens of the US), versus immigrant rights groups (for all people).

A very extreme liberal will consider all mammals, or even all organisms to be part of their group. (This tends to attract people like PETA members and Hindus.)

So since it is a continuous scale, it is silly to draw a single line and say "This is conservative" and "Beyond this is liberal". If you are an White-Seperatist collecting automatic weapons to prepare for the day the commies take over, then you would think Barry Goldwater was a liberal! In a similar manner, if you studied the policies of the original English Liberals of the seventeenth century, you would think their ideas were quite conservative by today's norms. They were pretty much what we would call Chamber of Commerce Republicans, and their (fierce) opponents were Royalists. This was reflected in the new world by the American Revolution, where the revolutionary forces opposed the Tories.

In the US right now, we are in a very wierd position. So-called conservatives mostly support an administration that has abandoned almost every conservative position by raising an enormous debt, nation-building, foreign intervention, encroaching on our personal rights, vastly increasing government size and powers, etc. The very term "liberal" has been demonized by the right, to the extent that all meaning has been stripped away. People who support the 40 hour work week are being lumped together with Stalin! So it is getting to be very difficult to even tell what the labels "conservative" and "liberal" mean.

2006-08-18 15:49:50 · answer #3 · answered by pondering_it_all 4 · 1 1

You can't refer to a political party as a "culture", the hippies were a group of students from UCSF that believed you could solve anything through peace instead of war and hardly had anything to with the democratic party. Most of them didn't even take drugs, that is what the movies portray.

For you to make fun of "mental disorders" is really cruel. I'm sure your mother is real proud of you.

2006-08-18 16:00:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Her version of it and how strict you extremely were are probably diverse memories. Its continuously extra accessible responsible somebody else even as your scared and embarrassed and indignant, all of which she probably became on the time. Your nevertheless her mom yet you actually have the probability to be her chum now and help her. If she does have a meth situation you want to get it uncovered to the police right now, its risky and she would not favor to be round it. they could placed her in a application to help her get extra constructive.

2016-11-30 19:18:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

So what is conservativism? A deformity?

Really. . . Because someone has free will and doesn't agree with you, you say it's a mental disorder?? That is where the Nazi party began in Germany.

I don't care what someone "is" - conservative or liberal. If they think for themselves, then they get my respect. It's that simple. If you don't respect someone for their right to think as they choose, you're closer to a Nazi than you thought.

2006-08-18 16:06:18 · answer #6 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 2 1

well isn't it a fact that all republicans are racist homophobic pricks with nothing better to do than to single out minorities and proclaim that America is strong when in fact your half baked policies are why the American economy has never been closer to complete and total collapse, if you war tooting bible babbling racists dont stop your infatuation with self destruction then there wont be an America left to save from those so called "terrorists"

2006-08-18 15:57:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

It's not a birth defect, hippy parents thought it was 'liberating' to get their kids stoned with them.

2006-08-18 15:56:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

I think you're an idiot that knows absolutely nothing about history outside of what Fox News tells you.

2006-08-18 15:50:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Your right and If John Kerry started smoking dope on the Swift boat and never stopped. Back at the Tomb they would not let him light up he was in training with "W"

Go big Red Go

2006-08-18 15:56:05 · answer #10 · answered by 43 5 · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers