Double Standards of some Liberals

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Double Standards of some Liberals
200
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 1:39pm
I thought this was interesting while driving home from work I heard this whole thing. Tell me what you think.



I was listening to the radio the other day and two men were debating in regards to Kerry. The liberal man was holding a sign that read "Kerry-a war hero"...When asked why he believed Kerry to be a war hero he explained his courage in fighting in Vietnam and that alone should qualify him as being a "war hero"...then the conservative asked him if he was going to vote for Kerry and the liberal man said "Definately!" The liberal man brought up the prisoner abuse in Iraq and how those men and women who performed those war crimes by putting underwear over these prisoners head and humiliating them were a disgrace to the country. He was then asked by the other man if he'd ever vote for any of these men or women that performed such acts down the road for President? The liberal man said "heck no". The other man went on to play a tape where Kerry himself in an interview spoke of the atrocities he and fellow militarymen participated in such as burning down Vietnam villages and other activities that were war crimes while in Vietnam. Kerry with his own words and voice admitted such things happened and do happen in a time of war no doubt about it. ( you could hear the audio tape of his interview) The man then asked the sign holding, Kerry supporting, liberal man how he could vote for someone who actually burned down and killed people in their own villages during Vietnam for President but would never consider voting for those who commited war crimes such as humliation in Iraq in the future as President? Does that make Kerry a war hero he asked? The liberal man was at a loss for words. He contradicted himself...he judged these soldiers in Iraq as a "disgrace to their country" but would vote for Kerry for President of the United States of America.

The reason for posting this story was to give a little insight on the double standards some liberals hold for their own and the mind-set the have.

Sorry so long but it's worth the read :)

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 12:45pm
<>

So now it was a "random person holding up a sign" the conclusion you make as that all such people are then liberals? >>>>

What is so hard to understand about what I am saying? Yes he was in a crowd and was pulled out of it to discuss his "sign". Are you kidding me with what you are asking? I mean from just reading on these boards alone it is confirmed how many liberal people think. Voting for Kerry for the reasons I mentioned are well known on these boards and from every single person I have come in contact with who is planning on voting the "not G.W.B" ticket. My own fiance' is planning on voting for Kerry and he doesn't even know why to tell you the truth it is upseting.

Personally I've found numerous people who claim to love Bush but don't have a particularly good reason for doing so as well. >>>

Really? I can't speak for you in your personal life but on these boards it is apparaent why the people who are voting for Bush are doing so. It is made quite clear and with plenty of informative facts and opinions. Have not seen or heard anything like that when it comes to the voting mentality of most liberals. It is an oberservation that I have managed to come to the conclusion by no fault of my own that those who are voting for Kerry do not know why, don't know much about him at all and just want GWB out of office...that is about as extensive as it gets. Even on the news you hear people interviewed on the streets and there are those people saying "I am voting for Kerry, anyone but Bush"...talk about Blind!

<>

so this guy, because he didn't happen to "hear" the same interview you did on TV is showing a lack of knowledge that is scarey to you? What about all the things he may have happened to "hear" that you didn't. Perhaps your lack of knowledge would scare him equally. >>>

How would my lack of knowledge scare him if I showed no lack of knowledge? You are not making sense here. I didn't go and hold up a sign of Bush stating such that would then turn around and prove me to be a walking contradiction. If you are going to go in public and make such a statement, be prepared to back up your statement otherwise stand there and remain speechless which is exactly what he did. I think that the reason those who do know certain things about Kerry, it's because they cared to find out. That's my whole point...too many people don't care to find out, they just want to vote "blindly" without an ounce of knowledge to why they are doing so. You say you can say the same about Bush...how is it that when Bush is here in Presidency right now and the majority of the world know already what he is about...agreeing with it or not is one's perogative but at least they know...it's in their faces everyday.

I agree with you that ignroant people vote all the time but this does not only happen on one side. There are plenty of people on the right who are unwilling to even look at information that raises questions about Bush, dismissing it as hogwash and propaganda. That to me sounds like coming from a place of willful ignorance/lack of knowledge as well. >>>

There is a difference from having an opinion about Bush and basing it on his actions...we all have that right, but voting for someone just because he isn't someone else it about as blind as you can be. You call it lack of knowledge when actually it's an opinion. Just because someone isn't so quick to judge Bush based on the massice liberal spinned media doesn't mean he isn't knowledgable, nor have I seen barely any Bush supporters not doing their best to explain why they are voting for Bush and why he is doing what he is doing...most of the debates here are based on the defense of Bush with loads of information and knowledge about such subjects relating to Bush and Co. That doesn't seem blind to me.

<>

I agree, so kindly remove your foot if you please. I haven't read it, I've "heard it" on television numerous times. Gee, I hope you don't plan on voting with a "lack of knowledge", that would be very scarey indeed.>>>

What a waste of a response. Is that all you can come up with? Pretty pathetic if you ask me. I am not sitting her saying Bush isn't rich or white now am I and then putting down Kerry for being such. So what is your point with this anyways? I actually don't think you have one to tell the truth. I haven't contradicted myself due to lack of knowledge.

Come on, when you talk about a double standard let's look at both sides. No one can know everything that is going on. I don't, and you don't. Conservatives as well as liberals will have to go and vote without knowing everything. You can't tell me that the Republicans out there voting are a paragon of information and the Dems are all totally ignorant? There are those on both sides that make a point of informing themselves to the best of their abilities and thousands of others that do not lift a finger to do so.>>>

No not all Dems are ignorant...some on this very board are some of the most knowledgable and intelligent Dems. I have come in contact with yet...I am discussing the majority of the one's I have seen, heard or met...those who will accuse a "Bush supporter" to be "blinding following Bush" and then contradict themselves by blinding voting for Kerry. I am talking about those people who judge someone and condemn them and base their vote on such when in actuality their party is just as guilty for it too. If you are going to judge anyone for anything, you better be sure the person you are supporting isn't guilty of such things too. You end up looking like a walking contradiction and quite ignorant.



iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 12:58pm
From Kerry's interview,

<>

If my memory serves me (correct me if I'm wrong) you felt that those participating in the abuse in the prison as a few bad apples while others said that this was probably condoned from on high (the beloved Bush administration). You staunchly defended the governemnt as you always do in every situation if I recall. Sorry if I'm mistaken. >>>

I wasn't convinced and there was no actual proof stating Bush had anything to do with the ordering of such treatment. I still stand my ground on that issue. You are not mistaken.

According to this interview by Kerry, he (and many others) were following orders given to them by their government. So what is it to be? In order for this not to be a double standard and to say that the man who would not vote for the soldiers but who would vote for Kerry, we would have to make the assumption that BOTH were following orders (and this is not the official stance on things). If BOTH were following orders given from on high, then yes, it might be hypocritical to support/critisize one but not the other. >>>

It is still a double standard...the man had no such knowledge of what Kerry did in Vietnam (most likely didn't care to find out) but regardless of who ordered the treatment, these people committed acts of what is to be said went against the Geneva Convention. Kerry admitted undoubtedly he DID go against the Geneva Convention and knew so too. It is still in the process of determining the limits of such treatment for these prisoners may or may not have been protected under the Geneva Convention. That is debatable and it is also lacking proof of the President ordering such treatment. I am not saying it wasn't ordered by anyone but I do not believe it was ordered by the President himself. Kerry admitted the higher ups all the way to the top gave such orders. It actually supports my theory more in that Kerry knew it was wrong and was ordered to do so and he admits that. These Iraqi's may or may have not even been protected under the Geneva Convention and there is no proof they were ordered by the "top" to do so. The man that had the "sign" wouldn't have voted for these current soldiers for future Presidency

but would vote for Kerry who committed much worse atrocities while unmistakenly going agains the war laws...but you are saying it's not a contradiction because Kerry was ordered to do so? That doesn't matter one bit.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 1:02pm
Well then he needs to live with the consequences of his actions...ordered or not. It still doesn't take away from the contradiction I was talking about. I would like some info about the murdering of soldiers by their own if refused to do immoral things at war. Do you have any information about that?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 1:09pm

<< it might be a sign that Republicans are shrivelled up prunes who are satisfied with much less. >>


Nah. We have more of the big Os, too.

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 1:26pm
<>

Oh I understand what you are saying all right. I also understand that you refuse to acknowledge that the double standard can go both ways.

A lot of people are voting against Bush because they KNOW what they are geting with him and they don't like it. Good reason as far as I'm concerned. A lot of people are also informed about Kerry. Not all of them vote like your fiance. Your arguemnt that he is an unknown doesn't hold water. All first term presidents are unknown entities until they get into office.

<<...talk about Blind!>> The only thing I can add to that is ditto.

<<...how is it that when Bush is here in Presidency right now and the majority of the world know already what he is about...>>

Exactly! You just made my point for me. You might be satsified with what Bush is doing but a great many others are not. It goes both ways. People DO know what they are getting with this man. That is why they don't want it.

<>

Geez! I never said YOU were, I said that many Republicans were. I can't remember the interviews I watched where this took place, suffice to say I have heard it and I was only telling you that I had. I'm not denying that a double standard exists on the part of some liberals but YOU are denying that one exists on the part of some conservatives. THIS is the point of my arguments to you.

<>

Yes, I have a point but you are so caught up in your own double standard and your own feeling of infallibility and superiority to even see it as it goes whizzing straight over your head.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 1:37pm
<>

You views are so black and white it kills me. Most of us have heard about the more heroic feats by Kerry during the war so the man might have had an opinion based upon those. So here is the conclusion based upon what is known by me currently about Kerry's service in Vietnam.

He was in Vietnam. He did a couple of herioc deeds. He (like most soldiers who served in Vietnam) also followed orders given to him by his superiors to commit atrocities typical of wartime. Then he publically admits to his regret over that. Oh I get it....Kerry admits his faults ( a sign of weakness). Bush never admits to his (a sign of strength).

I see a whole bunch of shades of grey here. You only see the dark side of his career because you are bound and determined not to let ANYTHING shake your faith in GW Bush.

Remember, you might be informed (I don't deny it) however, you reject anything that does not fit with your view of the virtues of this administration. I don't think the point of your research usually is to inform yourself but only to back up your already pre-conceived notions.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 1:42pm
I really don't know how to respond to that.

However, I read some poll somewhere that ranks Canadians way above Americans (including Republicans) in the "love and sex" department.


So there! Nyah Nyah!

LOL

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:09pm
In all fairness, let's compare apples with apples..From what I gather (or is at least claimed) those who did the abuse in Iraq were doing it on their own, there was no orders to abuse prisoners, which is why they were being charged. The things described by Kerry, however terrible they were, were orders from above, done by all soldiers. If it had not, then he would have been charged.

Second of all, I think Kerry became a war protestor, so clearly he had regrets and tried to make up for it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:14pm
<>

Oh I understand what you are saying all right. I also understand that you refuse to acknowledge that the double standard can go both ways.>>>

When have I refused to acknowledge that? I am discussing the majority of Democrats/liberals I have come in contact with...it's not that hard to understand. If you want to talk about your personal feelings and observations about the Republican'conservative voting process and mentality, go ahead and make your own topic.

A lot of people are voting against Bush because they KNOW what they are geting with him and they don't like it. Good reason as far as I'm concerned. A lot of people are also informed about Kerry. Not all of them vote like your fiance. Your arguemnt that he is an unknown doesn't hold water. All first term presidents are unknown entities until they get into office. >>>

That's fine to not agree with Bush but to just vote for someone else who may or may not be worse isn't a good reason and to imply that means you support "blind" voting. A lot of people are informed about Kerry like who? Did you over-read my post about this very ivillage board having so many using that "vote for anyone except Bush" mentality? Maybe from what you are implying is a good enough reason you feel it's ok to do that and maybe that's why you haven't taken notice. I didn't say everyone votes like my finace. He is just one of those lost and confused one's who might not understand how blind and dangerous that kind of voting is. I am on a mission to educate him and not allow him to vote with such blindness and to hold America to the fate of having a President simply and mainly and almost only because he isn't the latter.



<<...talk about Blind!>> The only thing I can add to that is ditto.>>

How am I blind? Your ditto implies you feel I am blind...so may I ask you to support that accusation? thanks.

<<...how is it that when Bush is here in Presidency right now and the majority of the world know already what he is about...>>

Exactly! You just made my point for me. You might be satsified with what Bush is doing but a great many others are not. It goes both ways. People DO know what they are getting with this man. That is why they don't want it. >>>

That's fine to not agree with Bush or not want to vote for him...all I am saying is know who you ARE voting for instead of just voting to get someone, anyone else in office other than him. That is the epitome of "blind" voting.

<>

Geez! I never said YOU were, I said that many Republicans were. I can't remember the interviews I watched where this took place, suffice to say I have heard it and I was only telling you that I had. I'm not denying that a double standard exists on the part of some liberals but YOU are denying that one exists on the part of some conservatives. THIS is the point of my arguments to you.>>

I am not denying it doesn't happen with anyone...I am simply pointing out the majority of liberals/democrats that have been publicized or brought to my attention the'r reasoning on thses board in regards to their voting mentality that they are voting blindly and there are many who are against war but will vote for Kerry who fought in one...they are against those who commit war crimes but will vote for Kerry who committed them...they are against blindly following the President but will blindly follow Kerry. You see the specific contradiction of examples here? Would you like to give me some examples of Republicans/conservatives who have made a stance and are voting accordingly but don't and can't even say why or those who won't vote for Kerry because of something Bush himself has done? List some contradictions please.

<>

Yes, I have a point but you are so caught up in your own double standard and your own feeling of infallibility and superiority to even see it as it goes whizzing straight over your head>>>

My own double standard? How exactly? You accuse me of such yet have nothing to go on to support such a claim...nice. My own feeling of ifallibility? Superiority? Again back that up with support otherwise quite the accusations because we both know that doesn't go far without proof. Looks like my point is going right over your head for you refuse to acknowledge the fact that there are quite a few liberals/democrats that on this very board will vote the latter only because well it's the latter. Great direction to head the country especially if you don't agree with what's being done now...just blindly agree with Kerry, it's much better then blindly agreeing with Bush. ::rollseyes::

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2004
Fri, 07-09-2004 - 2:20pm
My only point is how uninformed a lot of liberal/democratic/Kerry supporting people are...find out what the man is about before voting in November is all I ask...it doesn't have to be Bush, just vote wisely, educated and with enough knowledge so you don't contradict yourself. I can't sway an opinion, and I am not trying to...I am observing how the vote for most of those stated above base their votes on and with quite a bit of lacking criteria to make such an important decision. I don't think everything is black and white...but some things are. Vote and know who you are voting for and why...that is pretty basic logic don't you think? Nevermind don't answer that, I already know your answer.

Pages