I learned years ago the futility of arguing or debating points of contention with drunks (otherwise reasonable people impaired by excessive alcohol intake) or illiterates (otherwise unreasonable people impaired by insufficient intellect). I was recently reminded of this proclamation when an obviously sober person strongly criticized this very blog. To be more specific, the person criticized my view of the world. Under all circumstances, except the two specific exceptions I notated in my first sentence, I would be fine with any critique of my opinions or writings. What allows me to laugh AT the individual lodging this specific negative critique can be summed up in one simple URL, or in this specific case, one ultra-simple URL known as http://www.screwliberals.com.
Much like myself, I feel reasonably certain your first impression of the deep thinking, razor sharp wit and analytical ability displayed by this individual in naming this website alone, makes for one formidable master-debater. It momentarily took me back to some debates all adults remember participating in on playgrounds across America when we were in elementary school. We lacked the wisdom, command of the language and ability to thoughtfully craft an intellectual response more than "oh yeah" or perhaps a less than complimentary reference to your debate partner's mother.
Sadly, a certain percentage of people never progress beyond our grade school reasoning skills. They're not intellectually capable of justifying their thoughts and positions through their advanced mental acuities, but only through the same childish name calling that served them as mentally undeveloped children. I'm happy to provide publicity to the individual responsible for http://www.screwliberals.com. The person responsible for putting out this blog has every right to do so. Clearly, it's not a crime in the United States to espouse your views under the First Amendment. Intellectual content or in this case, lack thereof, should never be a deterrent to doing so.
I just think it's acknowledgment of mental inferiority when you feel the need to name call and denigrate everybody who doesn't share your views. George W. Bush is a master of this practice. Whenever he is questioned about anything the least bit negative to him, he either sidesteps the question or launches into a contrived, nonsensical attack that has nothing to do whatsoever with the original question. People like this avoid intellectual discussion by their singular insistence that their view is 100% right. If you don't agree with them, they're incapable of scoring debating points with clear concise argument and instead take a trip down memory lane and call you a derogatory name.
People like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter earn massive amounts of money appealing to people devoid of common sense or the ability to formulate an idea based on specifics rather than ideology. I don't consider myself to be liberal anymore than I consider myself conservative. I wish people who live in the middle ground of both parties could somehow organize a third party and leave the left and right wing extremists all alone to harmlessly and anonymously amuse themselves. Until that day occurs, I would much rather align myself politically with people who care about what's best for all the people of this planet, as opposed to what's best for only the people just like themselves.
The definition of LIBERAL is: one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways. A CONSERVATIVE is defined as: one who adheres to traditional methods or views. So, if I have to choose between being open-minded and able to think for myself, or being close-minded and adhering to only to one basic way of deciding, I'll take liberal every time. I remember reading years ago that there was a relatively simple difference between intelligent people and illiterate people. Intelligent people talk about ideas, whereas illiterate people talk about other people. I'll continue to explore my views by expressing my open-minded ideas. The illiterate among us will unfortunately continue expressing their views through the close-minded methodology of http://www.screwliberals.com.......
Much like myself, I feel reasonably certain your first impression of the deep thinking, razor sharp wit and analytical ability displayed by this individual in naming this website alone, makes for one formidable master-debater. It momentarily took me back to some debates all adults remember participating in on playgrounds across America when we were in elementary school. We lacked the wisdom, command of the language and ability to thoughtfully craft an intellectual response more than "oh yeah" or perhaps a less than complimentary reference to your debate partner's mother.
Sadly, a certain percentage of people never progress beyond our grade school reasoning skills. They're not intellectually capable of justifying their thoughts and positions through their advanced mental acuities, but only through the same childish name calling that served them as mentally undeveloped children. I'm happy to provide publicity to the individual responsible for http://www.screwliberals.com. The person responsible for putting out this blog has every right to do so. Clearly, it's not a crime in the United States to espouse your views under the First Amendment. Intellectual content or in this case, lack thereof, should never be a deterrent to doing so.
I just think it's acknowledgment of mental inferiority when you feel the need to name call and denigrate everybody who doesn't share your views. George W. Bush is a master of this practice. Whenever he is questioned about anything the least bit negative to him, he either sidesteps the question or launches into a contrived, nonsensical attack that has nothing to do whatsoever with the original question. People like this avoid intellectual discussion by their singular insistence that their view is 100% right. If you don't agree with them, they're incapable of scoring debating points with clear concise argument and instead take a trip down memory lane and call you a derogatory name.
People like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter earn massive amounts of money appealing to people devoid of common sense or the ability to formulate an idea based on specifics rather than ideology. I don't consider myself to be liberal anymore than I consider myself conservative. I wish people who live in the middle ground of both parties could somehow organize a third party and leave the left and right wing extremists all alone to harmlessly and anonymously amuse themselves. Until that day occurs, I would much rather align myself politically with people who care about what's best for all the people of this planet, as opposed to what's best for only the people just like themselves.
The definition of LIBERAL is: one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways. A CONSERVATIVE is defined as: one who adheres to traditional methods or views. So, if I have to choose between being open-minded and able to think for myself, or being close-minded and adhering to only to one basic way of deciding, I'll take liberal every time. I remember reading years ago that there was a relatively simple difference between intelligent people and illiterate people. Intelligent people talk about ideas, whereas illiterate people talk about other people. I'll continue to explore my views by expressing my open-minded ideas. The illiterate among us will unfortunately continue expressing their views through the close-minded methodology of http://www.screwliberals.com.......
<
No comments:
Post a Comment