09-19-2005, 03:32 AM
Chaerophon,Sep 18 2005, 09:17 PM Wrote:Naw, I 'misposted' my post. :) As it stands, it could be read either way.
What I meant to say? Pundits on the Left often imply that in order to be a 'liberal' one must be pro-choice. After all, if you're not for 'women's rights' [sic] how can you be a liberal?
Pundits on the right (particularly Coulter, I've noticed) condemn any idea that appears to be vaguely 'liberal' on the basis of the fact that 'liberals' are bad people [sic, again] who think that its okay to kill a half-born baby.
I'd say that of the "Coulter rants" that I've had the good fortune to hear (or read), about 90% have come to one of two conclusions: "liberals kill babies" or "we should take over Canada". As you point out, rallying cries for the ignorant (which is not to say that that is only a problem in the US!).
[right][snapback]89612[/snapback][/right]
Same goes for affirmative action it seems. I see both of them as "necessary evils", that have a point to existing, but hopefully the need for them goes down over time to nothing.
I may be dead, but I'm not old (source: see lavcat)
The gloves come off, I'm playing hardball. It's fourth and 15 and you're looking at a full-court press. (Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun)
Some people in forums do the next best thing to listening to themselves talk, writing and reading what they write (source, my brother)
The gloves come off, I'm playing hardball. It's fourth and 15 and you're looking at a full-court press. (Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun)
Some people in forums do the next best thing to listening to themselves talk, writing and reading what they write (source, my brother)