Proud to be a Filthy Liberal Scum

Loud, Proud and I don't care about hurting a conservative's feelings!

What Makes Me A Liberal: Mike Telford

I am a Liberal:
I don’t break the Law
I pay my taxes
I help my neighbor
I support my schools and levies
I support local businesses
I am proud to have served over 20 years in my country’s military
I am NOT a useless Hippie looking for hand-outs
I ALWAYS vote
I respect Education and those that have the calling for it
I have never cheated on my wife
I listen to the differing opinions of others
I believe in our country’s Constitution
I believe in racial, sexual and social diversity
I would never use religious dogma to explain my positions
I support reasonable political dissension and dialogue
I support Animal rights and have a rescue dog
I don’t measure a person by his material wealth
I respect other countries and their national interests

I believe all of these and more aspects of my Life help to make me a better person, a better American and better equipped to represent my country and its intrinsic positive values rather than wallowing in intolerance, suspicion, dumbed-down paranoia, wholesale hatred, rampant greed, media brainwash and selfish perpetual economic stratification of our citizens.

‘Liberal’ is a positive term, not an insult. What have you done to earn that moniker?

Single Post Navigation

14 thoughts on “What Makes Me A Liberal: Mike Telford

  1. Jasper on said:

    Excellent. Be proud to be you. I forwarded your words to many.

  2. Reblogged this on While you were sleeping and commented:
    I can’t help myself – I love this blog!

  3. You have an accurate grasp on what it means to be a liberal!!! And many Conservatives would be less ignorant if they could grasp what you said!

  4. mootmag on said:

    would love to post this on mootmagazine.com! Hope you don’t mind! We’re a liberal magazine. Hope to see you there!

  5. mootmag on said:

    Love what you wrote! Check out mootmagazine.com. We are a print and online liberal magazine. Would love to have you write something for us sometime! Thanks!

  6. rightthinkingone on said:

    I wish I were a liberal, because then everyone would like me. My family would start talking to me again, and chances are, my ex-husband would want to renew the marriage vows he broke when I started spouting conservative opinions.

    I’d like to be a liberal because it’s ever so much easier to allow others to form my opinions for me instead of researching an issue myself. That always gets me in trouble, especially when the facts I discover diverge from the latest politically correct consensus.

    I’d like to be a liberal because then I’d be rewarded for all my shortcomings and nothing would ever be my fault. I’d be an important cog in the wheel of social justice, and a cherished warrior in the current fight for equality.

    If I were a liberal, I would be free to have sex whenever and with whomever I want — and be considered ’empowered’ to boot. I could abort any inconvenience with nary a thought because my rights to my body trump the life I would have suctioned out of me.

    I’d like to be a liberal Very cool. Especially since my stock portfolio has tanked.

    I want to be a liberal because they care so much. They have a lock on all the fashionable emotions, like tolerance, diversity, equality and patriotism. And as long as my intentions were pure and I ‘care’, I wouldn’t have to accept responsibility for any negative consequences that my actions might cause.

    I’d like to be a liberal because everyone knows that conservatives are racist, homophobic, stupid and, well, beneath contempt. Conservatives are motivated by — gasp — profit, instead of being nice. Enough said.

    It would be swell to be a liberal because I’d be able to redefine reality to my own specifications. I could turn failure into success, murder into choice, lies into ‘misstatements’, and theft into investment. I would automatically be considered wise, instead of opinionated. Best of all, I could make up the rules as I go along, change them in midstream and then demonize anyone who doesn’t agree with me.

    It’s great to be a liberal because everyone knows they hold the moral high ground. They don’t lie, cheat or steal. Oh, and they don’t condone torture. The media says so, so it must be true.

    Before I am able to join this community of man, however, there are a few ground rules:

    I have to acknowledge that government is the best and only solution for any problems America has. Despite the fact that pretty much every government solution to date has been a disaster.

    I must agree that America is bad and white Christian males are responsible for all that is wrong with the world. Further, I must agree that terrorists and third world dictators are either freedom fighters or misunderstood men of good would.

    Oh, and I must acknowledge that dialogue is better than war. Even though decades of dialogue haven’t worked, things are different, now that Obama is president. I must have faith. After all, the times, they are a changin’.

    I’d, of course, be expected to not only condone, but happily embrace gay marriage and the long list of newly minted sexual behaviors, and swear to never mention the adverse health risks or the proven harm they do to traditional families.

    I’d also have to quit judging people. (Except conservatives.) After all, liberals would allow me to do whatever I want, free from moral censure, and it’s only fair I do the same for them.

    I’d have to immediately quit smoking, in public at least. I’d be required to agree that global warming is real and man is the cause. Even though the earth has cooled in the last decade, everyone knows its still getting warmer. I’d also have to renounce Christianity in favor of Mother Earth and believe that the Constitution is a ‘living instrument’.

    I’d have to agree that victimhood trumps merit and that liberals know best. Always. And lastly, I’d have to support the notion that racism is still rampant, even if it is the silent ‘institutional’ type.

    In return, I’ll be accepted, popular, and invited to the best parties. I’ll be eligible for the right to housing, health care, a living wage (even if I don’t work) and happiness. And as long as I remain a liberal, no-one is allowed to insult me. How cool is that?

    I’ll finally get my columns published in my own hometown paper and would have a good chance of getting face time on MSNBC. Best of all, I’ll be able to atone for my sins by merely paying Algore for a few carbon credits. Then, I would live happily ever after. Isn’t that worth sacrificing such ethereal and frivolous notions like freedom, individualism and principles?

  7. I enjoyed your thoughts. I cannot see how any self aware person, even a conservative, could disagree with a single sentence or claim its inverse. If I take that as a given; i.e., no one will admit in public they enjoy killing little kittens. Even the phrase sounds repulsive…I believe there is one basic difference between the two extremes of political thought: do you embrace change or support the status quo .

    Change is the universal constant. Nothing would exist with out change. However change, especially drastic change, scares the bee-Jesus outta everyone, but liberals seem better equipped to deal with it. Conservative by the very definition implies resistance to change, support the status quo. It seems a conservative lacks a spirit of adventure, a thirst for new knowledge and a willingness to step where no one has.

    Myself, While I have many facets of liberalism, but find my self much farther to the left. As an alternative to capitalism and socialism I am a syndicalist, a form of anarchism that brooks no tolerance to government intervention and or direction in our lives.

    Thanks again for your compelling thoughts.

    • rightthinkingone on said:

      That is not quite true. Conservatives do not believe in change per se, because change can be extremely harmful.

      But in truth, it is Liberals who resist and are fearful of change. Why do I say that?

      Think about virtually all of the programs that Liberals support and advocate. Virtually all have to do with guarantees and keeping safe: Health care insurance, government jobs, social security, secondary education paid, extended unemployment benefits. Some Liberals want guaranteed standards of living, housing and so on.

      In other words, Liberals keep insisting that the government guarantee.

      The syndicalist may contend that he does not want these, but syndicalism is really not in touch with the reality of human nature or the world.

      • You’re confusing “change” with “unnecessary risk.” Liberals believe in equality of opportunity, conservatives believe that being born to wealth or privilege automatically makes you more worthy of consideration.

      • rightthinkingone on said:

        No, Conservatives believe in Rule of Law. Under Rule of Law, all are equal. Liberals would undermine Rule of Law by bending the law to achieve specific outcomes and not going by the letter of the law. For example, Affirmative Action undermines this concept; it distorts and changes rules to achieve specific outcomes that Liberals deem desirable.

        And to change the expression to “unnecessary risk” is only to play a word game. The overall point is that Liberals press for government-provided security, and this shows that they are the ones fearful of a future that is somewhat unpredictable.

      • Ohhh, nice attempt there! Conservatives believe in the rule of law? Then why do they resist all attempts at ferreting out the massive fraud on Wall St.? The answer, of course, is that the law doesn’t apply to the rich and powerful. Laws are for the little people. Conservatives have proven this time and time again. Waterboarding was illegal, and still is, but when the president authorizes it (something he’s bragged about) suddenly conservatives don’t think it should be pursued as a criminal act.

        AA, on the other hand, even the playing field by ensuring that minorities get the same opportunities as every one else. Basically, it’s the only response to white privilege.

        Finally, I’m sorry the point is too nuanced for you but “unnecessary risk” is distinctly different from “change for the sake of change.”

      • rightthinkingone on said:

        If business colludes with government, it is probably not abiding by Rule of Law, and Rule of Law may or may not be enforced.

        Your contention has two inherent flaws:

        1. That financial manipulations are part of some kind of conspiracy for certain political groups, rather than the people in the financial markets themselves.

        2. The insinuation that Republicans – under whom some – but not all – of these alleged perpetrators of the financial proglems, are “conservatives.”

        In reality, the wealthy have more opportunities to avoid justice, but that has nothing to do with conservatism. That has been the case throughout the world, everywhere. Please do not be naive. It has absolutely nothing to do with Conservatism; the associations have been formed in many by associations propagated by Liberals who are essentially anti-free market capitalist. Anyone can find cases where rich “seem” to have escaped justice, but also where Rule of Law applied. Take Bernie Madoff. The point is to keep striving for upholding Rule of Law and not undermine it with Liberal “social justice.”

      • “If business colludes with government, it is probably not abiding by Rule of Law, and Rule of Law may or may not be enforced.” No collusion is required, the rich and powerful simply do not answer to the same laws you and I do. They break the law and they are given a slight slap on the wrist. If that. Collusion would mean that they planned to break the law and the government knew beforehand.

        “That financial manipulations are part of some kind of conspiracy for certain political groups, rather than the people in the financial markets themselves.” Those “certain political groups” otherwise known as the GOP made sure the conditions were ripe for abuse and then sat back and ignored the abuse as it occurred. Why else would they fight tooth and nail against the reforms that would curb those abuses?

        “The insinuation that Republicans – under whom some – but not all – of these alleged perpetrators of the financial proglems, are “conservatives.” Now who is quibbling over terminology? If Republicans claim to be conservatives and they are re-elected repeatedly by the conservative movement and do what the conservative movement wants (less taxes for the rich and deregulate everything) then it is safe to say that they are “conservatives.” If you feel that they are not then perhaps it is you who are not a “real” conservative? I don’t know, that’s between you and your party.

        “In reality, the wealthy have more opportunities to avoid justice, but that has nothing to do with conservatism.” Oh but it does. Conservatives maintain the status quo or reverse liberal progress where ever possible. If you support a system that has an inequality of opportunity like you just admitted then, yes, the inequality has everything to do with conservatism. And woohoo for Madoff. But that’s a meaningless comparison and you know it. There was nothing about his operation that could be obscured by legalese and cooked books or buried under legitimate bussiness. He was small potatoes compared to the banks. They ripped off millions of customers and none of them have gone to jail for breaking the law literally millions of times.

        “the associations have been formed in many by associations propagated by Liberals who are essentially anti-free market capitalist.” Nope, it’s been formed by your own party that has elevated unrestrained greed above all else. Children go hungry in the richest country in the world and conservatives call for more tax breaks for the rich who already have more money than they can spend. Liberals don’t have “make” connections, we just have to point out what you are doing and people can draw their own conclusions.

      • rightthinkingone on said:

        Bernie Madoff.

        Next, as I wrote before, this has happened everywhere in the world. It is not a “conservative” phenomenon, of course.

        Next, we should keep trying to enforce Rule of Law. No system is perfect, and to say that it should be rejected or is completely invalid because it is not perfect is to destroy its essence and ask for the impossible. Conservatives emphasize Rule of Law as opposed to Rule of Man which is what “social justice” is all about.

        “Collusion would mean that they planned to break the law and the government knew beforehand. ”

        Maybe not, but probably. Suppose a utility company colluded with the government to have a monopoly in a community “for its own good?” Maybe the govt official was paid off in some way, or maybe he thought it would be better for the community. But either way, it undermines the free market and is a form of collusion.

        “Why else would they fight tooth and nail against the reforms that would curb those abuses?”

        Be specific: What reforms were resisted?

        {If Republicans claim to be conservatives and they are re-elected repeatedly by the conservative movement and do what the conservative movement wants (less taxes for the rich and deregulate everything) then it is safe to say that they are “conservatives.”}

        A big part of this is that an image is being presented by the Left and Democrats that Republicanism = Conservatism. Many, if not most, of Bush’s policies were not conservative, of course. But the Left wants to keep the association. One other thing: If a person is a Conservative, where is he to go? To the Democrats? Surely not. Form an independent party? Well, that insures Obama and his cronies stay in office.

        The movement now is an attempt to get back our Conservative principles.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: