Why Are Liberals So Condescending?

We just can't help ourselves LOL.

Seriously I don't know what liberal means anymore. Pat Buchanan, who I agree w/ on a far range of issues, is a liberal by many of today's conservative standards. What does that mean?

I think the only observation I'm confident in is the difference in attitudes between nearly all the conservatives I know (which includes almost my entire family) and the progressives, liberals etc on the other side. Conservatives almost to a person are far more visceral in their political views. I tend to notice how extremely emotional they get over their bread and butter issues like abortion, homosexuality and religion in society. I can also honestly say outside of grad school I've never met a conservative well informed on the innards of public policy. That's not a sleight...it's just a matter of how people look at the world and you find a hell of a lot of people who don't want to bother w/ the details.

Take the fact our health care system is rated way behind all the other modern nations in overall quality (I believe we're 37th overall) and we spend WAY more on health (over 17% of GDP while most modern countries spend around 12%). Btw England and Canada spend less than 10% of GDP on health!!! Well...I only hear conservatives still saying we have the best medical care in the world and get it a lot cheaper than those single-payer socialized systems. There's just not a lot of attention to detail, or what some might call facts.

But generally yeah I'd agree liberals or whatever come off as assholes most of the time. They all seem insanely frustrated we can't do better and because their opponents are almost always telling the American people we have it great.

Sorry but I have alot of conservative friends and those are really pretty much non issue for us. What I see is the liberal media and party pushing for everyone to think that they are main issues so they can tie all conservatives to the extream right. Just look at how they have tried to protray the people doing the Tea Party stuff. Yes we have an extream side that those are the main issues but for most its not the main issue. I can't even think of the last time I had a conversation with another conservative on any of those topics. The left also has their extream side.

Just for you Goat . . . . since you can't tell the difference between a leftist and a right winger.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/q3W7zcpIQwk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/q3W7zcpIQwk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Excellent video Trample.

Did you read the article? The thread title is the title of the article. It's actually a really solid read.

Liberals also do not like to clutter their minds wiih FACTS, it distracts them from their goals. :silly:


The whole brouhaha over the Tebow commercial before they even knew its content is another example of their "agree with us or you're trash" attitude. It turned out to be a harmless, non-offensive message that EVERYONE should be able to agree with, but since it was from an organization with a "hateful" name like "Focus on the Family", they automatically went into attack mode to censor anything they think they may not agree with...before they even heard it. This is not a unique liberal response. Support their ideas or you're racist/bigot/homophobe/etc, but try to share an idea they don't like, you must be shut up for "spewing hate speech" and "preaching".

Great read.

Ive always hated the “Attack the messenger not the message” type attitude. It just comes across as so wrong and narrow minded to me. I dont understand how Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman can constantly refer to the Tea Party Movement participants as t-baggers. Arnt they susposed to be journalist to some extent? I guess its just easier to discredit people instead of challenging them.

Great read.

Ive always hated the “Attack the messenger not the message” type attitude. It just comes across as so wrong and narrow minded to me. I dont understand how Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman can constantly refer to the Tea Party Movement participants as t-baggers. Arnt they susposed to be journalist to some extent? I guess its just easier to discredit people instead of challenging them.

Exactly. This is also why it seems the media picks and chooses which "scandals" to expose. Sometimes, it fits their (the media AND Administration) agenda to discredit and ruin certain politicians' careers. Sometimes it would hurt their cause to lose someone so they protect them as long as they can. Pretty much every politician could be exposed for things IF the media was really fair and unbiased, and the President didn't choose to protect certain people. Some can utter a single off-color remark and be run out of town. Others can commit serious crimes, not pay their taxes and gravely insult people with no consequences. It's an ugly game, sadly controlled and led by the liberal media's selective morals. All should be exposed and covered, to let the voters decide who stays and who goes.

A lot of them have been locked away in academia running their very closed off circles so anyone outside of their "norm" is clinging to their guns and is a right wing wacko.

I've never understood comments like this. If academics, the brightest and best educated people in America, are liberals, doesn't that actually say something very positive about liberal politics?

I've never understood comments like this. If academics, the brightest and best educated people in America, are liberals, doesn't that actually say something very positive about liberal politics?

"Those who can do. Those who can't teach."

Old Chinese Proverb.

Liberals also do not like to clutter their minds wiih FACTS, it distracts them from their goals. :silly:


The whole brouhaha over the Tebow commercial before they even knew its content is another example of their "agree with us or you're trash" attitude. It turned out to be a harmless, non-offensive message that EVERYONE should be able to agree with, but since it was from an organization with a "hateful" name like "Focus on the Family", they automatically went into attack mode to censor anything they think they may not agree with...before they even heard it. This is not a unique liberal response. Support their ideas or you're racist/bigot/homophobe/etc, but try to share an idea they don't like, you must be shut up for "spewing hate speech" and "preaching".

They also say they are prochoice so why are they upset about someone talking about their choice. The truth is they are really just pro abortion but that does not sound very good.

I've never understood comments like this. If academics, the brightest and best educated people in America, are liberals, doesn't that actually say something very positive about liberal politics?
I know some very book smart people but other then that they are pretty dumb. Two doctors I know I would let them both cut me open but I would not let either one of them run my office or work on anything I have.

I've never understood comments like this. If academics, the brightest and best educated people in America, are liberals, doesn't that actually say something very positive about liberal politics?

Let me preface by saying my statement does not apply to all well educated.

People can often study their way out of real context. Very much like too much government, people start believing idyllic versions of the world, and ignore the reality that humans have chaotic foibles. They move to a place where one can think that all problems have solutions if we just study one more variable. Academic studies have an important place in our society, but they are not the "best and the brightest" everytime. Many businesspeople(like bill gates), charitable people (sister theresa) and just everyday people who weren't for one reason or another did not choose college are as good, or better, and as smart or smarter, than the people who have chosen Academia as their life's pursuit and passion.

Respectfully, your very statement, that academics are the best and the brightest of this nation, points to -I believe- the condescending attitude the OP was possibly referring to. The concept that a life long pursuit of academic knowledge is more valuable than other forms of knowledge gained by toil, labor, corporate development, or even charitable acts is a false belief, in my opinion.

Life is fascinating, and each individual is worthy of respect and acknowledgement that they have a point of value to contribute. A man hammering away to earn enough to support 3 children may not know enough to argue Keynesian or Smith, or whether a ABM Radar needs to be stationed in Poland, but to his children he most likely is the best dang hammerer in their lives.

Sorry Lotus, again I respect academics, and think it is an important pursuit of mankind, but I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement that it represents the best and the brightest. Some do, but some are just blowhards, like any other walk of life.