Category: “propaganda” pages
You might be a liberal if…
Written by Chad Phillips
Tuesday, 05 June 2007 15:39
10 Comments

Back in March I posted the following statistic:

In the 2004 election, network exit polls showed that "21 percent of the voters who cast ballots called themselves liberal, 34 percent said they were conservative, and 45 percent called themselves moderate." But when you ask these "moderates" where they stand on the issues, you find that their values are consistent with the liberal worldview and they vote their values.

Simply put, apparently a lot of liberals don't know they're liberals. So, I thought it might be helpful if I provided some characteristics which (generically) define the field of modern liberalism, politically and philosophically. *Many of these are derivative of other "maxims" in the list, but in the interest of being a bit more comprehensive, I thought I'd include those as well.

  1.  If you ascribe to the divine spark mentality (that man is basically good), you might be a liberal.
  2.  If you believe there's no absolute foundation for morality, you might be a liberal.
  3.  If you believe in the "support troops not war doctrine," you might be a liberal.
  4.  If you believe, with regard to the Constitution, that time clouds intent, you might be a liberal.
  5.  If you believe that everyone has a right to free thought, free speech, and the freedom to exchange ideas except when they disagree with    you, you might be a liberal.
  6.  If you believe that people have no right to impose/legislate morality unless it's you who does the imposing/legislating, you might be a liberal.
  7. If you believe in the "separation of church and state" doctrine, you might be a liberal.
  8. If you believe that it's okay to treat people any way you want, but then when they return the favor you're being treated unfairly, you might be a liberal.
  9. If you believe every woman should have the right to murder her unborn child, you might be a liberal.
  10. If you believe that the reason you have less money is because someone else has more, you might be a liberal.
  11. If you believe the fact that your neighbor has more than you entitles you to a portion of their stuff, you might be a liberal.
  12. If you believe that people shouldn't be held accountable except when they have the "wrong" philosophy, you might be a liberal.
  13. If the only absolutes you believe in are "there are no absolutes" and "the double standard," you might be a liberal.
  14. If "choice" is your highest value except when it speaks of racism, the environment, free speech, free markets and the rule of law, you might be a liberal.
  15. If you believe that there's nothing wrong with you making moral judgments, but when others do it, they're being intolerant and judgmental, you might be a liberal.
  16. If you believe that winning is more important than how you play the game, you might be a liberal.
  17. If you believe that ideology is what makes one right, irrespective of content, you might be a liberal.
  18. If you believe that name calling and mudslinging is a valid substitute for rational argument, you might be a liberal.
  19. If you believe that it's wrong for conservatives to claim they're right about something, but perfectly valid to claim your views are right, you might be a liberal.
  20. If you believe the United States and Israel are the only obstacles to peace in the Middle East, you might be a liberal.
 
Going ‘green’ more than politics for Gore; It’s a way of life…
Written by Chad Phillips
Tuesday, 01 May 2007 14:59
No Comments

The "Green Party" wants you! If everyone in America would boycott the tissue industry in favor of the natural alternative (one's finger) we could "single handedly" save the rainforests.

In addition, nasal effluvia, in all its various forms, is a largely untapped resource, which is environmentally friendly, and as close as the inside of one's nose. In fact, I spearheaded initiatives in creating new technologies for mining this underutilized resource.

I'd like to challenge every citizen and illegal alien in America to join with other forward thinking individuals in following Ms. Crow's environmentally conscious example. Say"NO" to tissues and "Yes"to the environment by picking "green." It's the real "party" of choice; just ask any four year old.

 
JellyFish of the World Unite
Written by Chad Phillips
Saturday, 01 April 2006 17:03
No Comments

If I had a pattern of telling you I was going to do something, but then not following through, what would you deduce? Probably you would think me a flake with little or no integrity, and you would be justified in your assessment of me. One thing is certain; you wouldn’t take me seriously the next time I opened my mouth.

This same scenario is being played out between the United Nations (UN) and the Iranian government. It was reported this week that the UN is demanding that Iran cease and desist from its uranium enrichment program. The suspicion is that Iran plans to use this technology for developing nukes.

It was further reported that the statement issued by the UN is not legally binding, but is merely the “first step” in getting Iran to fall in line with nuclear nonproliferation.

What I’m wondering is, why would Iran (or any sentient being for that matter) take the UN seriously? Remember this is the same UN who “strong-armed” Saddam Hussein. The dialogue which lasted approximately a decade between Saddam and the UN went something like this.

UN: Saddam, will you please stop doing all those mean and immoral things you do?
Saddam: No.

After a while of this Q & A, the UN says the following:

UN: Stop or else…
Saddam: Or else what?
UN: Er, uh…Stop or else. (UN officials huddle and start whispering in hushed tones)
UN official 1: “What do we do? He said, ‘or else what?’”
UN official 2: “I don’t know we never thought he’d call our bluff. (UN official 2 scratches head) I know; threaten him with economic sanctions.”
UN: Saddam.
Saddam: Yes.
UN: Our superiors say you must stop your shenanigans at once or we will be forced to impose economic sanctions.
Saddam: And that means exactly what to me?
UN: OK Saddam, you asked for it.
Saddam: Whatever…

After some more threats and angry faces the UN finally imposes sanctions with the tacit agreement of Russia and China. Strangely there is no change in Saddam’s behavior. “And then the unthinkable happened…”

UN official 1: I don’t understand. The usual empty threats and sanctions which have no effect on those in power are having no effect on those in power.
UN official 2: Why don’t we try threatening some more?
UN official 1: It hasn’t worked in the past with this guy, but it’s worth a shot.

More threats and economic sanctions are imposed, and can you believe it, Saddam refuses to get with the program? Finally, after much hand wringing and a few more threats of eminent doom, the US steps in and does what should’ve been done a long time ago; they take the xenopsychopath out.

To summarize, basically the UN has no backbone. The Iraqi government didn’t take them seriously, and you can bet that Iran won’t either. Why should they? If what they’ve done in the past is any indication of how they do business with rogue countries, there’s no reason to put any stock in what they say. Time will tell, but when Iran continues on its merry way with nuclear proliferation or some other WMDs program, (in blatant disregard for the UN’s “demands”) remember you heard it here first.

Chad Phillips