5 Types of Liberals

Despite the best effort of ths incoming administration strong political divisions are getting stronger each and every day. It is important to recognize that the battle is not so much between political parties, but between idealogies. Dominant factions comprised of liberals and conservatives dominate today’s debates with smaller groups like libertarians and socialists vying for attention. Given who is in charge, it is important to identify the “enemy” and understand that there are many kinds of liberals. Some of the greatest conservative practitioners emerged out of liberalism (Reagan, Churchill), so while it is convenient to label these people as afflicted with the dangerous disease of liberalism, do keep in mind – it is curable.

Like a famous quote once suggested: “If you’re not Liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not Conservative when you’re 35, you have no brain.”

5 Types of Liberals

Liberalis intellectualius: Most dangerous of all liberals, domestic enemies of the United States often sporting impressive Ivy League degrees and are considered to be the Crème de la Crème of the intellectual elite. While their education accomplishments are certainly impressive, they often consider the Constitution an archaic relic and have no shortage of revisionist suggestions. Due to their academic prowess they are powerful debaters, extremely stubborn and truly believe that their intelligence and deep understanding of complex issues can be and should be used to make the world better. Because of their intelligence they often consider conservatives little more than English speaking nitwits and have no compunction labeling them knuckle dragging neanderthals . Here is the major problem though; Because they are so intelligent and because they constantly strive to change the world, they invariably turn to centralization and federal control. Despite history demonstrably illustrating the failure of centralized policies, these Ivy League braniancs insist that THIS time it will be different and previous failures were not due to flawed policies, but flawed human beings. They refuse to accept that the market and the economy is much too complex to be controlled by humans and insist on revising history to suit their own needs. Much like the New Dealers of the 30s flaunting their Columbia degrees, modern day Obammunists hailing from Harvard, Yale and other liberal vortexes are poised to exercise their intellectual futility when the opposite is so sorely needed.
Examples: Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal, Al Gore, anyone from Harvard, Jews.

Liberalis federal aidus relius: One of the largest constituencies of the Liberal party this group represents all those that rely on the federal government for sustenance. This includes a large number of people who legitimately require aid due to physical impairments, overwhelming hardships and other perfectly reasonable excuses. Sadly, this includes an ever larger number of people who exploit the system and have grown accustomed to the way of life suckling on the tit of the government. This overwhelmingly large group (and getting larger) resent the very fibres of this society that make this great country what it is, focus their angers on big business and the wealthy and justify their welfare state acceptance as something normal. Unfortunately for them they fail to realize that the very systems implemented to help these people destroy them, welfare checks that encourage broken family units and subsidized housing units create a perpetual cauldron of sloth discouraging incentive, hard work and perseverance. The government at the same time ignores the overwhelming consequences of their own actions due to an ever growing and reliable voting base.
Examples: Julio Osugueda, Peggy the Moocher, minorities

Liberalis arborus huggus: Tree-huggers, granola munchers and general do-gooders comprise this next set of liberals. Driven by earthly desires these people do not claim to be economic wizards nor do they care, materialism does not concern them – saving the earth, and holding hands with everyone does. They are deeply concerned with the advancement of human civilization and resent the progress made by industry due to it’s perceived negative effect on humanity. They could care less that this advancement enables people all over the world to live longer and potentially more fulfilling life, because the destruction of an innocent – yes I said innocent – tree, is more sinful than aborting an 8 month fetus. They believe in global warming as if it was gospel and because it came from the mouth of a liberalis intellectualis can be considered as much, despite the fact that half of the world’s scientists are skeptical. Wars to them are an abomination and if only world leaders could pick up some stringed instruments and sing Kumbaya, peace would instantly put aside their religious and cultural differences and live happily ever after. Almost regardless of age, arborus huggus continue to believe that everything can be achieved via dialog and ignore that humanity has fought for the past 5,000 years. This misplaced faith in human nature would be laughable if it did not shape the foreign policy of so many politicians.
Examples: Code Pink, Tim Robbins, half of Hollywood, pot heads

Liberalis infantius: A massive group largely represented by students and persons who have yet to enter the work force. A unique group of individuals who generally lack both the experience of real world or any serious fundamental understanding of economics, foreign policy, finance or anything else that matters. Emboldened instead by newfound knowledge gleamed from institutions spewing liberal propaganda, this group largely feeds off itself in a fury of prebuscant peer pressure angst. As most parents would attest teenagers are impossible to reason with considering they believe the world is against them and constantly mutter phrases like “You just don’t understand” or “If you were my age…”, which of course is fine when it comes to cleaning one’s room, but NOT fine when it comes to selecting the next president of the united states. Infantius naturally gravitate towards social issues, since never having paid taxes and lacking any kind of real economic knowledge leaves them rationalizing with their hearts or relying on CNN – like gay marriage, abortion and equality. If only they would just espouse their issues in the form of parades and other nuisances instead of the voting booth, America would be a much better place. At least they have a big healthy heart
Examples: 75% of all youth.

Liberalis cardius bleedus: This last kind of liberal can be found anywhere and manifests itself in the most awkward of situations, like an argument about the detrimental effects of welfare for example. Cardius bleedus or “bleeding heart” liberals provide no historical examples, no technical explanations and generally lack fundamental knowledge of the economy or fiscal policy (similar to infantius). Instead they prefer to extend their compassion to all the unfortunate individuals of our society and for some strange reason truly believe that the federal government is the only institution capable of helping. They consider themselves to be the champion of the unfortunate eve though conservatives routinely beat out liberals in raw dollars given to charity. When asked why cardius bleedus prefers inefficient government aid over charity organizations one is usually met a with a blank stare followed by a dismissive shrug or wave of a hand. One point worth mentioning is that cardius bleedus is also heavily prone to conversion, given that they are typical middle class working stiffs, ironically fed up paying higher taxes and would routinely use phrases like “good enough for government work”. Go figure.
Examples: Your co-worker, your neighbor

DC to have House representation, despite Constitution.

Bill coming out of DC have now assumed an eerie pattern, the are largely partisan, passed with the help of liberal Republicans and either screw the American people (SCHIP, Stimulus Bill) or simply poo-poo all over the US Constitution.

Introducing of course; District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 and supported by the usual suspects from the GOP side.

Sen. Thad Cochran [R, MS]
Sen. Susan Collins [R, ME]
Sen. Orrin Hatch [R, UT]
Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN]
Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R, AK]
Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME]
Sen. Arlen Specter [R, PA]
Sen. George Voinovich [R, OH]

What is so remarkable about this bill? The fact that is passed for starters, despite it’s inability to do so for decades. Secondly, it opens the flood gates to turning DC into a state, in violation of something that a few of us still hold quite dear.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 1:
“The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature. “

In case you are wondering, this is not from the ‘Right-Wing handbook of Moon Battery and the Paranormal’, but rather the US Constitution. Some argue that Article 1, section 8 provides the necessary wording – at least that is what the liberals would like you to believe, but section 8 states the following:

“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;”

Unfortunately it has nothing to do with congressmen or senators, but rather a reminder that the district is under the auspices of the US Government and therefore subject to all legislation. Spinning the clause to your own liking is asinine.

Now clearly this entire district leans heavy Democrat, so one could easily justify the purely partisan vote considering the Republicans have nothing to gain – other then – you know…protect the US Constitution, something all Senators vow to do upon accepting the job. However the subjectivity and personal squabbles over morality is precisely why we have a bloody document in the first place! Spelling out certain things clearly and succinctly such that we can have some order in this country. If there is any way this can end up in the Supreme Court, it should – because it will be struck down or so I hope, any lawyers interested in commenting I am all pissed off ears.

Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s new chief of staff

This is the first major apointee by Obama and something we should be watching. This will give us an indication of what the tone in the White House will be.

Who is Rahm Emanuel?

He is a former Clinton aide turned investment banker. A Chicago politician with a fiery personality and a strong Israel supporter. The Chief of Staff is a powerful position and will set the mood and tone of the White House.

There are plenty of speculation that he is no centrist and I will use two gauges to determine this.

First, from the American Conservative Union (link on right):
Life score:
Emanuel: 13.09

0 is most liberal.

For comparison’s sake,
Obama is a 7
McCain is an 82. (NO idea how he get 82).

Second, America for Democratic Action (link on right):
Emanuel: 95%. LQ is the liberal quotient.

100% is most liberal.

For comparison’s sake,
Obama: 75% LQ for 2007
McCain got 10%. (Kind of surprising).

It would appear that the speculation of his centrist idealogy are grossly overblown.
Another big government spender has joined the ranks. *sigh*