Nope. A liberal loon's idea of tolerance means tolerance for only the speech and ideas that he agrees with.
Case in point - Columbia U. When the Minutemen Project went there to speak they were stopped by liberal loons in the audience who stormed the stage and disrupted the speech - with the tacit approval of Columbia's administration no less. Never invited back. They don't allow the ROTC on their campus either - simply because they don't agree with what ROTC stands for.
Oh yes - they'll invite that nutcase from Iran, and the university president has publicly stated that he'd of welcomed Adolf Hitler to speak as well. It just goes to show you that Liberal Loons are exactly that - loons.
Entries 1 and 3 apply:
loon
n 1: a worthless lazy fellow
2: large somewhat primitive fish-eating diving bird of the
northern hemisphere having webbed feet placed far back;
related to the grebes [syn: diver]
3: a person with confused ideas; incapable of serious thought
2007-09-25 10:56:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Michael M 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
"A liberal is a conservative who has been arrested." Thomas Wolfe, this is the opposite of your theory. "A liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet." Frank Rizzo, this is more in line with your theory. I would argue that the idea that conservatism comes with age is no longer valid. What do conservatives stand for now? No abortions? Small government? Fiscal responsibility? Law enforcement? Well, if you think that abortions and birth control should be illegal, that's probably an idea you were raised with. Conservatives can't really argue that they are fiscally responsible or stand for small government these days since they back a huge military, they created the Department of Homeland Security, huge missile defense shields, etc. A conservative view is low taxes and fewer government restrictions on business. Can anyone really support that given what's going on with Goldman Sachs and the insurance industry? Obviously whichever conservatives still support deregulation aren't doing so because of life experience. Anyway, I don't think that conservatives today are grown from liberals. They might have been more liberal in the past but I doubt it. On the other hand, I think people who were raised liberal are only seeing their worst fears of conservatives realized. If anything, the line between the two is becoming harder, faster and much less blurry. The only thing that might come with age is a greater respect for law enforcement. This is just because, as you get older, you're less likely to be at parties getting busted by cops and you're more likely to look to cops for protection. PICK A BEST ANSWER
2016-05-18 03:49:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
What kind of knowledgeable debate could Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity provide all they do is lob baseless insults. Besides it was a world leaders forum the only reason that crackpot was invited was because he is a world leader neither of them are world leaders in anything other than the production of noise pollution. I think they should let the Minuteman guy and people who actually can rationally discuss things on both sides of the isle come if the students want them, but not worthless pundits like Coulter and Hannity.
2007-09-25 10:48:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by UriK 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity are not important poeple...sorry. They are mouthpiece pundits without much to add constructively of their own. They don't contribute to educational environment at all (neither do Al Franken, Michael Moore, or other folk like that, so don't get me wrong). Chance to have a world leader talk about their view of the policies in their country is very important for exposure to the students. The most lowly world leader (say the King of some random island in the pacific) is more useful on a college campus than any of the American talking heads.
2007-09-25 10:47:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by C.S. 5
·
4⤊
3⤋
That is a good comparison. The Iranian President, and Ann Coulter, and Sean Hannity. They could all speak and have a hate fest. I think there is more damage that can be done with Ann's mouth than with any WMD The Iranian president may or may not be cooking up.
2007-09-25 10:48:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by Penny K 6
·
4⤊
2⤋
Try and let it go, ok. You don;t have to agree with what media tells you to agree with. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was asked to speak here in the US, and to pay his respects at ground zero and was insulted without ever being given a chance for any of that.
So you feel he's the only man who doesn't think the Holocaust is real? I know it's real, you may know it's real, but people, especially Americans, ought to know a little something about freedom of opinions.
We are hated by the WORLD, and it's not hard to see why that is, when you reach outside your own countries' news sources.
.
2007-09-25 10:50:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by twowords 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
No, Ann and Sean are guilty of much more heinous stuff than the President of Iran, they tell the truth and expose Liberal lies. That makes them especially detestable.
2007-09-25 11:37:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by plezurgui 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Yes, because we all know both Insanity and mAnn have such under-represented viewpoints in this country. Poor things...It isn't like they have an entire TV network to spout off their idiocy.
2007-09-25 10:49:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Pete Schwetty 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Actually I wish they would.
But the reality is Ahmadenijad (sp?) is a significant country's president - like him or not - and the other 2 are just blowhard entertainers... might as well be from Hollywood!
2007-09-25 10:53:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Bad M 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Probably not but I hear obomma is next on the stage with all his empty line of bs and edwards will bbq food all the poor poor chirren
2007-09-25 10:52:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋