News & Politics

Rant

The Other Side of the Fence

Posted 28 months ago|22 comments|458 views
Written by
Our very own redstateguy is fond of posting the conservative emails he receives as rants and raves. He recently posted one that purported to describe liberal and conservative views on a number of topics, from a distinctly conservative perspective.

That rave is here: http://www.rantrave.com/Rave/One-Fence-Two-Sides.aspx

In response, I would like to provide the flip side of each issue.

* Liberals who like guns are happy to abide by checks to ensure that they aren't criminals or mentally unstable prior to purchasing a potentially deadly firearm. They regard such measures as reasonable protections for other people's rights and safety. Conservatives who like guns demand instant satisfaction, and to hell with anyone else.

* Conservative vegetarians don't eat meat. Liberal vegetarians don't eat meat. Only militant PETA nuts demand that everyone else stop eating meat. They're not liberal or conservative, they're just crazy.

* If a liberal sees a foreign threat, he or she will go about trying to determine how best to neutralize it. Sometimes this means military action. Sometimes this means diplomacy. Sometimes this means intensive investigative work to bring down terrorist cells before they can strike. The toolbox has many tools, because the world is a complicated place. This greatly disturbs conservatives; their only tool, after all, is a hammer, so if a situation does not require hitting anything, they don't know what to do and would rather hit something anyway.

* Gay liberals would like to be able to go about their lives in peace, grow old and die together, and enjoy the same security and benefits of married life that straight couples receive. Gay conservatives prefer to pretend they're not gay, suppress their sexuality, and marry people who they aren't attracted to, resulting in miserable lives, broken homes, and - if they are politically active - hypocritical sex scandals after devoting their political careers to interfering with the lives of other homosexuals.

* Most black and Hispanic people in the United States are liberals, and regard the insistence on the part of conservatives that they have a victim complex as particularly insulting, given this country's history of oppressing minorities. Black and Hispanic conservatives are rare, and getting rarer as the Republican party continues to marginalize them.

* Liberals recognize the fact that sometimes people who are down-and-out can't get back up on their own. There are people on the streets who belong in sanitariums, and there are people on the streets stuck in untenable situations that could stand on their own if society would give them a leg up. As Ghandi said, "A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." Conservatives aren't aware that anyone's situation could ever require governmental assistance, despite red states being the largest consumers thereof.

* Conservatives boycott anything and everything under the sun. They boycotted Pepsi for supporting gay rights. They boycotted McDonald's for the same reason. Heck, they even boycotted George Lucas for his third prequel, which they perceived as a polemic against conservative fascism, instead of what it was: A bad movie. But when liberals let advertisers know their ads support racist idiots like Glenn Beck, they scream about their First Amendment rights, as if the First Amendment somehow guarantees *funding* for their favorite talk show hosts.

* Liberals, religious and non-religious alike, recognize that government and religion do not belong intertwined. They're not a peanut-butter/chocolate combination where each makes the other better. Rather, each makes the other infinitely worse, as can be seen in theocracies throughout the world. Conservatives, on the other hand, hate science and any facts that contradict their religious beliefs, because those beliefs are so fragile they require constant reinforcement. When a fact contradicts their interpretations of their religious texts, that fact must be attacked with incredible vigor.

* Liberals recognize the difference between health care and health insurance. They also recognize that right now, health insurance is a racket, a betting game in which the game is rigged against you. They are capable of doing the math required to see that everyone's costs will go down if they profit motive is taken out of insurance, and it is turned into what it should be: A shared pool of resources to cover expensive medical procedures and services for those who need them. Conservatives want the government to keep its filthy hands off their Medicare.

* Liberals see President Obama as a flawed human being who nevertheless seems to be capable of doing the job he has been elected to. Most conservatives disagree with him vehemently, as is their right. Some conservatives have been driven insane by his election, and have convinced themselves he is foreign-born, or secretly a Muslim, or both, or any one of a number of conspiracy theories that allow them to fantasize about him being removed from office.

I hope you find the contrast here instructive, redstateguy.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: Conservatives aren't aware that anyone's situation could ever require governmental assistance, despite red states being the largest consumers thereof.

Lie. Conservatives just do not want to create multiple generations of dependants upon govt. As the war on Poverty/Great Society did.

* Liberals, religious and non-religious alike, recognize that government and religion do not belong intertwined.

Fallacy, our governemnt was created to protect freedom of religion, not to protect the people from religion.

Conservatives, on the other hand, hate science and any facts that contradict their religious beliefs, because those beliefs are so fragile they require constant reinforcement. When a fact contradicts their interpretations of their religious texts, that fact must be attacked with incredible vigor.

Too broad a generalization, cannot let you say that. That would be like me saying all liberals are commies.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: * Liberals who like guns are happy to abide by checks to ensure that they aren't criminals or mentally unstable prior to purchasing a potentially deadly firearm. They regard such measures as reasonable protections for other people's rights and safety. Conservatives who like guns demand instant satisfaction, and to hell with anyone else.

What part of "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms" does it mention "reasonable protections"?? I mean really Where???

But when liberals let advertisers know their ads support racist idiots like Glenn Beck

Not a racist, until you can site multiple examples of discrimination, or examples of him treating other races secondary to his own this cannot be stated about anyone. It is a harsh term and to many people try to smear others with the ease they smear butter onto toast.

Black and Hispanic conservatives are rare, and getting rarer as the Republican party continues to marginalize them.
No conservatives are not marginalizing them, you state this as a fact, but it is an opinion. As matter of fact I see more blacks coming out odf the conservative closet. State Run Media just hides them.

28 months ago: "Lie. Conservatives just do not want to create multiple generations of dependants upon govt. As the war on Poverty/Great Society did."

I didn't say that's what conservatives want, I just said that red states use a lot of federal dollars. Here's a study: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html

"Fallacy, our governemnt was created to protect freedom of religion, not to protect the people from religion."

OK, so where do you draw the line? Should public schools be allowed to require students to pray? Should tax money go to fund religious projects? And if so, whose religion gets the money?

"Too broad a generalization, cannot let you say that. That would be like me saying all liberals are commies."

OK, let me ask you this, then: When religion and science come into conflict, which should be taught in a school setting?
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: BTW the Vegetarians we agree on, the Gay section, I got to give it thought. I just don't care if your gay what you do in the bedroom is your own business. Marriage for gay's makes it public, so I have to say no, albeit not a firm no I'm just not convinced enough to change the status quo.
28 months ago: Youre good Billyberoo. There are so many blanket generalizations is this post this is the only reponse it's getting.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html
Looks to me that the states on top tend to be the least densely populated states. I don't think you can label red and blue with this. LA is red, but their most populated city is blue, and they just got rid of a democrat governor. Just don't see the read /blue here. Even if they were red presidential, some are blue local.

OK, let me ask you this, then: When religion and science come into conflict, which should be taught in a school setting?

You say the earth was vreated 4.5 billion years ago, but there are some xtian sects that believe otherwise. Science this a, but religion says b.

Should public schools be allowed to require students to pray?
No, but they should not be banned from it.

And you should know me by now that the government should not give a dime to religious projects, but they should be taxing one hell of a lot less so that we as individuals can give to them.
I do not even think the federal government should fund public schools. It once again should be taxing less so that states and local municipalities can collect to run their schools as they see fit.

I beleive in governmnet just local and state. Fed is way to big ansd encompasses too many differing people, it can't work, we are living it right now, all we do in this country is argue
28 months ago: "What part of "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms" does it mention "reasonable protections"?? I mean really Where???"

I like how you leave out the part about militias, but that's not surprising. In any event, do you consider it likely that a criminally insane person with an Uzi will infringe on someone else's rights as delineated in the Constitution by killing them?

Here's how I look at it: Your right to swing your fists ends at my nose. In other words, if you do not have the freedom to exercise your rights in a way that abridges mine.

"Not a racist, until you can site multiple examples of discrimination, or examples of him treating other races secondary to his own this cannot be stated about anyone. It is a harsh term and to many people try to smear others with the ease they smear butter onto toast."

Way back in 2006, long before his comments about Obama, Media Matters put together a list of rather disgusting quotes from Glenn Beck, along with links to articles about each, most of which include video or audio. Here's a link: http://mediamatters.org/research/200605030014

"No conservatives are not marginalizing them, you state this as a fact, but it is an opinion. As matter of fact I see more blacks coming out odf the conservative closet. State Run Media just hides them."

Yes, I'll grant that that's my opinion, but I think the statistics back me up. Of course, I'm posting this in response to someone else's opinions, so you can't blame me for stating my own. :)
28 months ago: "BTW the Vegetarians we agree on, the Gay section, I got to give it thought. I just don't care if your gay what you do in the bedroom is your own business. Marriage for gay's makes it public, so I have to say no, albeit not a firm no I'm just not convinced enough to change the status quo."

I'm glad we've found a few points of agreement. I have a question, though: How is marriage public? I mean, a wedding is a bit of a spectacle, but in what other way is two people entering a social contract with one another public? If a gay couple in Iowa goes to the court house and has a Justice of the Peace marry them - avoiding any issues of offending anyone else's religious beliefs - then I don't see it as a public matter at all.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: I just didn't want to type that part, but if you want an aswer it's like how you only mention General Welfare. at times.

Next Criminals reliquish rights upon conviction of crime, or when PROVEN to be insane. So I have no problem with that. But my rights should not be hindered, for the longg amounts of time it takes to check if i'm a criminal. A swipe of my driver's license or I.D. should be good enough, but then there is a record of that transaction, that the government could use to take away my gun, I can't have that.

Getting married in a court house creates a piblic record, that's what makes it public, I aint talking shouting out to the world.

Media matters could find a way to make Mother Theresa a racist.

28 months ago: "Looks to me that the states on top tend to be the least densely populated states. I don't think you can label red and blue with this. LA is red, but their most populated city is blue, and they just got rid of a democrat governor. Just don't see the read /blue here. Even if they were red presidential, some are blue local."

Well, the red states do tend to be less populous, and yeah, there's some blue voting locally. But my point was that they vote Republican nationally, yet take in more federal dollars than they pay out in taxes.

"You say the earth was vreated 4.5 billion years ago, but there are some xtian sects that believe otherwise. Science this a, but religion says b."

That's surprisingly reasonable. It's also what we have now, with the caveat that the parts about what religious sects believe belonging in religious studies classes, not science classes. I'm glad to see another point of agreement.

"No, but they should not be banned from it [prayer]."

They're not. You can pray in school any time you like. The only thing that's banned is teacher- or principal-led prayer. So again, I think we basically have agreement.

As for the rest, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I think public schools should be very well funded, and should be funded at the federal level, because state-level funding disadvantages students in poor states, resulting in a vicious cycle of poverty and interfering with the interstate commerce that would otherwise help those states.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: Here's how I look at it: Your right to swing your fists ends at my nose. In other words, if you do not have the freedom to exercise your rights in a way that abridges mine.

So in other words, me loading my SKS and pointing it at you is ok by you.

To add, by having a public record (on the Federal Level) of gun purchases infringes on the right of the people (and/or states) to have a "well regulated militia, [which is seen as] being necessary for the security of a FREE STATE." How can the States be protected from a tyrannical Federal Government if that said government knows who has the guns to protect itself?
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: Disadvantage poor states, make themselves poor. So far federal money and education seem to mix as well as vinegar and oil Check this out.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/09/30/chart-of-the-day-federal-ed-spending/
28 months ago: "So in other words, me loading my SKS and pointing it at you is ok by you."

Ahh, no. That would be a direct threat to my life and well-being. A fist that has met my nose, if you will.

"How can the States be protected from a tyrannical Federal Government if that said government knows who has the guns to protect itself?"

Out of academic curiosity, would you be satisfied if the government could track whether or not you were legally permitted to buy guns at the time of purchase, but had no way of knowing after the fact that a given purchase is tied to you individually?

Regarding No Child Left Behind, I *never* supported that piece of junk legislation, but when Bush rammed it through, it got nothing but accolades from the right. It was all about accountability, supporters said.

School funding I support. Useless and expensive endeavors like that one, however, need to go by the wayside.
28 months ago: heynnn and billy:

Y'all have been hard at it. I'm going to try to catch up.

Guns: You're close heynnnn. To hell with those who want to limit my access to guns. I consider it disingenuous (not you) to say liberals "who like guns" and that there is no problem with governmental "checks" on who gets a gun. Why not let the states do it themselves?

PETA nuts are too liberals. They're not conservatives.

If liberals want to "neutralize" a threat, they do it by first seeing if we can all get along. If that won't work, liberals try to unilaterally get along with the bad guys. If that doesn't work, hopefully a conservative gets elected to knock the #$#$% out of the bad guys. (By the way "intensive investigation" includes monitoring terrorist phone calls with other terrorists in Pakistan.)
Sledge hammers are better than hammers.

Gay conservatives try their best (like straight guys and gals) to live their lives according to what Jesus said.
That means you and your gay "pal" don't get to be treated like a married man and woman. Period.

28 months ago: Many black people have become slaves of the state because welfare has corrupted their family structure, destroyed their initiative and self respect and made them dependant upon the government for handouts.

Many hispanic people have allowed their votes to be purchased in the same fashion.

Conservatives whatever the color of their skin are proud and strive to become better.

Liberals try in vain to have the government help those down-and-out. The government keeps those unfortunate people on their butts. Conservatives use their own wallets and elbow grease to help those down-and-out get back off their butts and on their feet so they can make it on their own.

And Ghandi was right on. Liberals use of the government only makes things worse on them.

Respecting boycotts, why have my children watch 2 homosexuals makeout on MTV? Why would I even want to watch that garbage.

Regarding calling Glenn Beck a racist, kill the messenger.

Let's agree to no public funding of broadcasts. PBS sucks.

Our country was formed by Christians to spread Christianity. For crying out loud heynnnnnn. What do you think made our country the greatest country ever in the world? What do you think is destroying our country now? You can't change that through your blue tinted glasses. Sorry.

No matter how much you want it, capitalism is not a racket. A racket is what liberals do in D.C.

No, Conservatives don't want the government to keep its filthy hands off their Medicare. Conservatives want Medicare to go away.

I'll take your word on what you liberals see in Obama. I'm am one of those being driven insane though. I hate to see my children's liberty stripped away before they ever really learned to cherish and appreciate it.

Absolutely, I find the contrast very instructive. I do not understand it one bit, but I find it very instructive.
28 months ago: @redstateguy

* Guns
Gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. I don't find a waiting period to be an infringement on my gun ownership rights.

* PETA
They call themselves liberal. I call them loony. And meat's delicious.

* Diplomacy
You conservatives want to treat every problem like it's a nail, since you only have a hammer. Watch some news from abroad some time, and you'll see that America's return to diplomacy has been welcomed throughout the world, and has already made headway towards defusing several potentially explosive situations.

* Homosexuality
If you don't like gay sex, or believe Jesus doesn't like gay sex, then don't have it. But keep your religion out of my bedroom. The problem here isn't the distaste for homosexuality, it's the desire to legislate restrictions on it. Period.
28 months ago: * Black people
No, redstateguy. It's a sick joke to talk about "slaves of the state" when Jim Crow laws aren't that distant a memory. When I was in high school, one of my best friends was a young black woman whose mother still remembered being forced to drink at the "colored" drinking fountain.

* Hispanic "vote buying"
Dreadfully racist and insulting, not worth replying to.

* Ghandi
Ghandi was a liberal. You don't get to claim him.

* America founded on Christianity
It's so simple, redstateguy: This is not a theocracy, and you can't turn it into one. If it was intended as such, the Constitution would declare Christianity the state religion, instead of very specifically ensuring that none could exist. For crying out loud, redstateguy...

* Capitalism
Of course capitalism isn't a racket. I'm firmly in favor of capitalism. Quick, tell me what "product" insurance company's sell. The answer? Nothing. Insurance isn't capitalism.

* Medicare
Then say so, publicly and out loud. Watch as your support continues to dwindle.

* Obama
Please name a liberty he has stripped away. Be specific.
28 months ago: 1. Put a picture of something liberal next to your name please. I tried to go to an extreme with my picture.

2. Obama is incremental. Once he gets health care (which he will), he'll start controlling what medical care I get, when I get it, who gives it to me, how much he'll pay for it. Then he'll control take control of my lifestyle and outlaw pork rinds and beer. Then it will not matter because the Chinese or the terrorists first, will take over everything or my family will be killed.

3. Your comment about support dwindling after killing Medicare proves my point about the liberal's purposeful actions to destroy individual self esteem and initiative. If we are not careful, Obama will have us looking like North Koreans with our heads down.

4. You don't understand Capitalism... competition, risk taking, market control, etc.

5. You don't understand our Constitution.

6. You can have Ghandi.

7. I agree the vote buying is dreadfully racist and insulting.

8. I'm just calling it what it is. Liberalism makes everybody dependent upon the state for everything. That sounds like slavery to me.
28 months ago: Red? why does Jim Crow always come up? What year is this? What America do they live in? Are they actually from this world or invaders from Mars? Hispanic vote buying... Has a point let me correct it.

Illegal non-american (not race specific) vote buying.
Let's learn how to be politically correct in our post so they don't know what we are saying. Just follow the lead of the left and say gray is gray even though they know there are at least 256 shades of gray. The darker shades are still grey, aren't they?
28 months ago: Careful with the color language Cypress.

Careful.......
28 months ago: It's not me that speak in whatever the shade of the day is.

It is not conservatives that say there is no "black and white" to any arguement. It is the reality challenged side that continues to use that when backed into a corner.

Humph. (thinking I can loose with this) There are not any black and whites in this arguement only grays.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
28 months ago: @heynn
I don't find a waiting period to be an infringement on my gun ownership rights.
Since the right to vote is also constitutional do you believe in background checks and waiting periods in order to exercise your right to vote??? Or at least a legal photo I.D.?

Out of academic curiosity, would you be satisfied if the government could track whether or not you were legally permitted to buy guns at the time of purchase, but had no way of knowing after the fact that a given purchase is tied to you individually?
the answer would be yes, but only a fool would believe that could happen?

Whether right or wrong the advantages to individual liberty out weigh the disadvantages when it comes to the second amendment, just the same as innocent until proven guilty.
By the way an interesting book on race relations is "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" by Thomas Sowell, difficult reading, however.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.