Bleeding Heart Conservatives, and other such buzzwords.

[carlosMM]

One of the things they're great at is coming up w/ easy to use, remember catch-phrases that have become part of the lexicon: bleeding heart liberal, liberal (as a negative), welfare mother, activist judges, liberal media, etc... I think they've done a great job of it, much better than the Dems.

Well, they had a job to do. The Dems, OTOH, had the option to use already existing phrases like Kluxer, Nazi, right-wing nut etc. for selected Reps, which meant that they felt hardly a need to stigmatize the rest of them. And maybe that is the point here: stigmatizing goes with a (very) conservative and intolerant mindset better than with a liberal (positive meaning) one.


Any before rmsharpe, MobBoss and consorts some running with their usual strawmen: Above, I am not saying that ALL or MOST Republicans are Kluxers, Nazis or nuts. Just that SOME of them were, and thus offered excellent targets for which no new catch-phrase had to be coined.

 

[Mastreditr111]

I must admit that I've never spoken to an emotional conservative who got weepy while complaining about politics.

Yea, to be honest, neither have I, and I am a conservative. (really a moderate on many issues, just an economic/gun control conservative.) Angry, yes. Annoyed, yes. Loud, God yes. Vehement, yes. But never weepy.

 

[Mastreditr111]

Any before rmsharpe, MobBoss and consorts some running with their usual strawmen: Above, I am not saying that ALL or MOST Republicans are Kluxers, Nazis or nuts. Just that SOME of them were, and thus offered excellent targets for which no new catch-phrase had to be coined.

Then SOME democrats definitely qualify as bleeding hearts or something like that. Both sides have their nutcases, its just that the republican nutcases are the definition of "vocal minority" and the Democrat ones tend to cry about stuff much more quietly and privately. Both sides can be painted with the same brush, because they are identical in almost every way but ideology anymore.

 

[carlosMM]

Then SOME democrats definitely qualify as bleeding hearts or something like that.

See what I mean? For them, you need the new buzzwords. You automatically used one, instead of an other temr

 

[Leatherneck]

I've always heard ...

If you are not a liberal when you are young, you do not have a heart.
If you are not a conservitive when you are older, you do not have a brain.

 

[.Shane.]

If you are not a liberal when you are young, you do not have a heart.
If you are not a conservitive when you are older, you do not have a brain.

And I've heard equally pithy "comments" stating moreorless the opposite.

Oh and this "quote" is typically (falsely) attributed to Churchill. No one has ever found a citation of him saying it.

 

[Leatherneck]

And I've heard equally pithy "comments" stating moreorless the opposite.

Oh and this "quote" is typically (falsely) attributed to Churchill. No one has ever found a citation of him saying it.

Well I never said Churchill said it I've just heard it for years. And I think the version I stated is more to the truth than the opposite. As you age (and I have) you become more conservitive as you have more responsibilities, children, bills, taxes, and the lot. When I was young I wanted to save the world, free everything, peace love and happiness ... then as the years pass reality sets in and you say oh crap I've turned into my parents.

 

[CaptainF]

Actually, it seems many posters enjoy being boxed in and stereotyped and even try to do it to themselves.



---
---

The underlying point that the OP is getting at, though I don't think its his intent, is that, at least in the US, the Repubs have been excellent, in fact dominent, in the political arena of propaganda the last 20 or so years. One of the things they're great at is coming up w/ easy to use, remember catch-phrases that have become part of the lexicon: bleeding heart liberal, liberal (as a negative), welfare mother, activist judges, liberal media, etc... I think they've done a great job of it, much better than the Dems.

Your pretty much right actually. I'm sick of it all.

People often accuse/think me of being a liberal, when i'm not really. If I am a liberal, i'm most certainly not of the "bleeding heart" variety. I support gun-control, am not a socialist, etc.

I've seen hard-ass, take no prisoners liberals, and shy, meek, whiny conservatives. Its nothing to do with political standing.

I just find it so bloody hilarious when conservatives throw all this poop at their foes, and fail to see that they already have egg on their faces.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

The underlying point that the OP is getting at, though I don't think its his intent, is that, at least in the US, the Repubs have been excellent, in fact dominent, in the political arena of propaganda the last 20 or so years.

Good Post Shaneo

The 'Liberal'/'Conservative' mudslinging in US Politics interests me since we don't have similiar divides on our side of the pond. True we have the Monkey's Tea Party once a week which is more like a bloody punch and judy show, but the voters themselves don't seem to be as entrenched in their views as US Voters. Perhaps I'm wrong and if I am I'm sure someone will point that out but I believe that after 18 years of a Conservative Government, many voters have been put off after realising that Labour are virtually the same.

 

[.Shane.]

Well I never said Churchill said it I've just heard it for years. And I think the version I stated is more to the truth than the opposite. As you age (and I have) you become more conservitive as you have more responsibilities, children, bills, taxes, and the lot. When I was young I wanted to save the world, free everything, peace love and happiness ... then as the years pass reality sets in and you say oh crap I've turned into my parents.

I think in the sense of the small "l" and "c", I'd very much agree. In terms of the big "L" and "C", I'd disagree, but meh.

 

[Mott1]

"Bleeding Heart Conservatives" are in abundance here. Those following the "War on Terror" in such a thoughtless, unquestioning, knee jerk fashion are the cases in point.

Their hearts are bleeding over some really limited and relatively small scale loses of life on their homesoil. They believe their people are worth more than anyone else, that there is a two or three tier value system to human life. They bleed for their own, higher tier humans, whilst growing cold to anyone else.

Their hearts bleed for a perceived lack of security for their (supposedly superior) people, whether they are really that much at danger or not. Their hearts and minds are highly susceptible to propaganda that reinforces that sense of insecurity and superiority, to serve its own power hungry, draconian, unprincipled ends.

Their reaction is to go out with the big guns and bust some heads, whilst also forgetting what it is that they are fighting for, the ability to plan ahead and more damningly - to realise consequences. They lose us the moral high ground and they create more of the enemy (intentionally and otherwise) - again because it suits their need to be viewed as an effective protector - and get voted back in by more thoughtless, unquestioning, knee jerkers.

These "bleeding hearts" embolden the enemy all the more and I would say are becoming more of a threat to our security than "the terrorists" ever were.

Your brazen animosity and anger toward the conservatives is very obvious, we hear you loud and clear. However in your feral rage you fail to see that you who unfairly portray conservatives in such a thoughtless, unquestioning, knee jerk fashion are also the cases in point.
I don't think their is one person (conservative or liberal) on this board who willingly believes that the lives of their "superior" people are worth more than any other human being.
You claim they are in abundance here, I've yet to see one.

The phrase "Bleeding Heart Liberal" is just a smoke screen to all this and a case of cheap mudslinging to boot. Such a phrase distracts from the fact many Conservatives have become Frankenstein Monsters, with no resemblance to the core principles that supposedly identify them in opposition to "the terrorists".

But I wouldn't go round using such smoke screens and mudslinging myself. It's enough to know the above on its own.

So basically the term "Bleeding Heart Liberal" is nothing more than a case of cheap mudslinging by those filthy conservatives because many conservatives are in "fact" monsters. "The terrorists" themselves hold higher morals than those frankenstien conservatives. Those damn conservatives are losing us the moral high ground huh?
Am I hearing you correctly here?
I don't know if it has occured to you that their exist an ideology that has 1.2 billion followers who believe they attain the moral high ground and that ideology ain't democracy. I find it amusing that many Leftist and Liberals who in their righteous pursuit for "pure" democracy are quick to condemn and criticize the conservatives and at the same time vigerously defend the very ideology that opposes democracy itself.

 

[zulu9812]

Their hearts are bleeding over some really limited and relatively small scale loses of life on their homesoil. They believe their people are worth more than anyone else, that there is a two or three tier value system to human life. They bleed for their own, higher tier humans, whilst growing cold to anyone else.

The British historian Mark Curtis coined a good word for this: he said that the British government treated those in developing nations as "unpeople".

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

I find it amusing that many Leftist and Liberals who in their righteous pursuit for "pure" democracy are quick to condemn and criticize the conservatives and at the same time vigerously defend the very ideology that opposes democracy itself.

Whilst I don't want to speak for Ram, he can do that for himself, I'd just like to point out that some Liberals don't necessarily "defend the very ideology that opposes democracy itself". Rather they acknowledge the right of others to have whatever form of Government they choose within their own borders without influence from outside.

I say some simply to avoid the categorisation which I opposed earlier.

 

[ironduck]

I don't know if it has occured to you that their exist an ideology that has 1.2 billion followers who believe they attain the moral high ground and that ideology ain't democracy.

Nice job shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[carlosMM]

Your brazen animosity and anger toward the conservatives is very obvious, we hear you loud and clear. However in your feral rage you fail to see that you who unfairly portray conservatives in such a thoughtless, unquestioning, knee jerk fashion are also the cases in point.
I don't think their is one person (conservative or liberal) on this board who willingly believes that the lives of their "superior" people are worth more than any other human being.
You claim they are in abundance here, I've yet to see one.

Look in a mirror - your posting style corresponds nicely with the attitude described the the OP - you knee-jerk attack anyone critical of anything 'republican'.

 

[Mott1]

Look in a mirror - your posting style corresponds nicely with the attitude described the the OP - you knee-jerk attack anyone critical of anything 'republican'.

Thats funny, you are rebuking me for the same reason I rebuked Ram. The irony, only I am niether a republican nor a conservative. Be as critical as you want to conservatives, I just pointed out the blatant hypocracy in Rams post.

I'd just like to point out that some Liberals don't necessarily "defend the very ideology that opposes democracy itself".

I agree with you, that is why I did not say that all Liberals or Leftists share the same opinion on that topic. I know many Leftist that are more adamant than any conservatives when it comes to opposing ideologies that counter the very fabric of democracy. I would be foolish to catagorize Leftists as a party that share one universal opinion.

 

[Rambuchan]

Your brazen animosity and anger toward the conservatives is very obvious, we hear you loud and clear. However in your feral rage you fail to see that you who unfairly portray conservatives in such a thoughtless, unquestioning, knee jerk fashion are also the cases in point.
I don't think their is one person (conservative or liberal) on this board who willingly believes that the lives of their "superior" people are worth more than any other human being.

Your post here is quite inaccurate and your comprehension skills are left wanting. I was not talking about all conservatives. I was talking about those that support the "war on terror". Read back you you will see this is very clear.

An eloquent miss of the target though.

You claim they are in abundance here, I've yet to see one.

Without putting too finer point on it, you must be blind. Or at least blinkered. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and opt for the latter. Read some more threads and you will see.

So basically the term "Bleeding Heart Liberal" is nothing more than a case of cheap mudslinging by those filthy conservatives because many conservatives are in "fact" monsters. "The terrorists" themselves hold higher morals than those frankenstien conservatives. Those damn conservatives are losing us the moral high ground huh?
Am I hearing you correctly here?

Yes, you are hearing me correctly. One must also consider the notion of consistency of moral message.

And I hope you realised that I used the phrase "Frankenstein Monster" as a literary allusion, not as "fact" .

I don't know if it has occured to you that their exist an ideology that has 1.2 billion followers who believe they attain the moral high ground and that ideology ain't democracy. I find it amusing that many Leftist and Liberals who in their righteous pursuit for "pure" democracy are quick to condemn and criticize the conservatives and at the same time vigerously defend the very ideology that opposes democracy itself.

Show me where I defended "terrorism" (as defined by the right that is), then I might take you seriously. This reads like you are projecting your preconceptions.

The British historian Mark Curtis coined a good word for this: he said that the British government treated those in developing nations as "unpeople".

Then Mark Curtis is as insightful and generous with his political findings as you are dear zulu. Thanks!

 

[Mott1]

Your post here is quite inaccurate and your comprehension skills are left wanting. I was not talking about all conservatives. I was talking about those that support the "war on terror". Read back you you will see this is very clear.

An eloquent miss of the target though.
Without putting too finer point on it, you must be blind. Or at least blinkered. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and opt for the latter. Read some more threads and you will see.
Yes, you are hearing me correctly. One must also consider the notion of consistency of moral message.

I guess I am "blinkered' then, thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. Again I have yet to encounter anyone on this board that feels the lives of their people are worth more than another. My point is that by reading your post, you believe only conservatives can hold this fascist mentality and Liberals by definition are the champions of democracy. You should consider that this position that you maintain goes against the fundamental principles of democracy.
I understand that you applied the phrase "Frankenstien Monster" to conservatives as an allusion, however this discribes very well your distasteful feeling on these particuler people. Just as you do not liked to be labeled as a "Bleeding Heart Liberal" I'm sure these conservatives to not enjoy being called "Frankenstien Monsters".

I am well aware of your loathsome opinion on the war on terrorism, I for one am a strong proponent of the war on terrorism. I guess in your eyes that makes me a fascist monster. However I ask you to consider that despite the differences in our political inclinations that we both ultimately share the same goal, world peace.

 

[Leatherneck]

I ask you to consider that despite the differences in our political inclinations that we both ultimately share the same goal, world peace.

I'm all for the War on Terror, I'm former military so I believe peace through superior fire power. But World Peace, it a great goal, a very lofty goal, as to my understanding there has never been a day in recorded history of worldwide peace where there was not a conflict of violence going on somewhere. Peace is only achieved through victory.

 

[ironduck]

Peace is only achieved through victory.

I thought peace was achieved through the refusal to fight.