I think that I'm becoming more liberal the older I get.

[Corganist]

Originally posted by wally

you said a lot in that statement, i don't think you know it.

Yeah. I could have phrased it slightly better. I wasn't trying to imply that moral obligation to others plays no role in my ideology. I was trying to say that any shift in my views has been based upon what I think is right (including morally right), and not upon how well myself or others perceive those views. I'm not all hung up on the question of "Am I a 'good' person for beleiving this?" I'm more focused on "Is this belief correct?" Some people seem to act like those two questions are asking the same thing though. I'm not sure they are.

[jczeroman]

Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel


Oh, shit. jczeroman's going to kill Julio!

Killing people with big, penis-shaped weapons is a sign of intelligence.

[jczeroman]

Originally posted by Mayfuck
That's good to know. Liberalism is a sign of intelligence.

Classical liberalism -- as rooted in freedom and the value of individual man based on natural inalienable rights is definitely a sign of greater "acceptance" or "tolerance." It also, I believe, enables a society which is constructed around such principles to produce individuals of a higher calibre of intelligence. I wouldn't go so far as to say that classical liberals are more intelligent, or that socialist liberals are less intelligent. But I believe that a society that frees itself from dark-age notions of tribal community and collectivism and choses instead to trust in reason and the empowerment of individuals will be a more intelligent society overall.

[Injektilo]

Originally posted by KingJeremy
1. I find myself further convinced that the death penalty is wrong after many years of thinking that it was right. My reason for this though is that I now think that a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole is a much harsher punishment.

I really don't think liberals are against the death penalty because they feel it's not harsh enough.


Anyway, for myself, I tend to see myself having moved a little more to the right maybe, at least when it comes to economic issues. Mostly because I don't know alot about economics, so I'm not really justified in having certain positions.

[Nimrod's Son]

It's more that the two parties traditionally support issues that are more important to certain geographic regions.

The millitary is very important in the south, and traditionally the GOP has been a much bigger advocate of the millitary.

Socialist ideals such as welfare are important to big cities. The Dems have traditionally been more into socialist issues.

These are just 2 random examples, not meant to be torn apart, but they help illustrate the difference is local and geographical, not educational.

[Lie]

Originally posted by Mayfuck
It's fact college graduates are more likely to be Democrat than Republican. The halls of American academia tend to sway liberal.

There are a lot of dumb college graduates out there.

[Future Boy]

Originally posted by Lie


There are a lot of dumb college graduates out there.

Here's one of 'em now...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...boy/ahahah.jpg

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally posted by Future Boy


Here's one of 'em now...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...boy/ahahah.jpg

That's photoshopped, you know

[relaxor!]

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
That's photoshopped, you know

Yeah, you're right. W isn't really our President.

[Corganist]

Originally posted by Future Boy

Don't be so mean. That girl is awful young to be a college graduate. Cut her a little slack.

[killer_tomato]

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
That's photoshopped, you know

is this also photoshopped?
http://jeb.be/images/bush/bush.jpg

[pale blue eyes]

I'm pretty sure that one is also.

[BeautifulLoser]

Originally posted by pale blue eyes
I'm pretty sure that one is also.

No, it's not, unfortunately.

Well, the binocular cover part, that is.

[Future Boy]

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
That's photoshopped, you know

Ill believe it when I see the original.

[dreamsofdali]

Originally posted by Future Boy
Ill believe it when I see the original.

ok:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/bushbook.asp

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally posted by pale blue eyes
I'm pretty sure that one is also.

It is

There's a Clinton one that's very similar as well

[Future Boy]

Originally posted by dreamsofdali


ok:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/bushbook.asp

Or maybe the White House is engaging in more of it's misinformation tactics.

I remain unconvinced.

[DeviousJ]

Originally posted by BeautifulLoser


No, it's not, unfortunately.

Well, the binocular cover part, that is.

Well, you can see the light focused through the lenses on his face. A good photoshopper has to consider all the angles!

[Nimrod's Son]

Originally posted by Future Boy


Or maybe the White House is engaging in more of it's misinformation tactics.

I remain unconvinced.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/binoculars.asp

[Future Boy]

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

http://www.snopes.com/photos/binoculars.asp

So the Clinton pic is fake, but the Bush one is real. Good to know.