A silly essay on conservatives and liberals

Remove all ads!

OK, a conservative broadcaster here in Canada named Charles Adler read this over the airwaves a few weeks ago. It tickled my funny bone. I looked around in the AoLS to see if someone had posted it but couldn't find it. If it has been previously posted, please accept my apologies. Also, the formatting succked, and I hope I did a decent job of making it legible.

Evolution of Liberals and Conservatives


Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunter/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:

1. Liberals
2. Conservatives

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented
yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages
were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing
the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as "girlie men".

Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals were symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like light beer (sometimes with lime added), but most prefer white wine or mported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like
their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.

Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal
injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals also invented the designated hitter
rule because it was not fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives tend to drink micro brew beer. They also eat red meat and still provide for their women and families.

Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers,
corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans
are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept
in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and forward immediately just for the heck of it.

Author Unknown

 

LKD - I had never thought that you would morf into a troll on this forum. Thanks for wasting our time with this Ann Coulter look-a-like trash. And I'm sorry if liberals offend you so much that you feel the need to post something like this. It's more than just a one-liner snipe but an extended tirade, which reflects little but the writer's immaturity and his hostility towards those who hold a different opinion than his. Can we all say "conformity?" And all this time I thought you were a class act...Happy trolling.

 

I found it mean spirited and insensitive as well. Sure, some conservatives may find tripe such as this amusing, but that's not saying much.

 

A pretty good joke, but if it were meant as such, you really should have put it in the *joke thread* in Whatnots. Putting something like this here is only going to make people think you seriously agree with what it says, since this is a serious subforum. I'm willing to assume this was a mistake, though.

 

I don't think LKD meant any harm by posting this. I also don't, however, think he really thought it through before posting it. So let's give him a break, he's never posted anything like this before, and I've never thought of him as a jerky partisan.

[edit: But then again, LKD, you wouldn't have found this funny unless you also thought it was kinda true. Which is disappointing.]

LKD, about a year ago I read a letter similar to this. Instead of casting Cons as strong manly men and Libs as weak effeminate cowards, as your letter does, it essentially compared conservatives to retarded children, cavemen, and the retarded children of cavemen. Though it was immature and pretty predictable, it was written with wit and a line or two gave me a chuckle. Like your letter, it was completely one-sided in whom it was mocking, and there's no way a conservative would have been amused by it. But unlike yours, I deleted the forwarded email and haven't thought of it since.

What would you think of me if I'd posted that here instead?

[ September 06, 2007, 16:04: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

Holy cow! Death Rabbit, I would have laughed my butt off had you posted that here, just as I thought people would laugh when I posted this one. I thought I made it pretty clear I thought this was a joke. I also thought that despite it's obvious Conservative bias it wasn't really that nice to Conservatives either, portraying them as unrelenting bigots (I see it as something like the idiotic Neo-Con persona that Colbert portrays on his show.)

I certainly didn't mean to troll, for pity's sake! My apologies to those who misunderstood my intent.

 

I think the piece is quite funny. And I'm what americans call liberal.

 

It seemed like a pretty weak analysis/theory to me. I have seen much better.

 

Analysis? Heh. If that's analysis, then I should hope you've seen better.

Apparently Canada has pundits no less idiotic and insensitive than ours at home. So apart from knowing that there are bigots in Canada, why should I care about this? I mean, okay, it could count as humor. I have no beef with the way it is delivered, but the content is imo a load of BS.

BTW. is anyone else still irked at how "liberal" is so commonly thrown as a left-wing appelation in Anglo-American political culture? Because I get the feeling that by now Adam Smith must be rolling in his grave so quickly that we could substitute a couple of nuclear power plants by rigging a turbine to his coffin (ok, some of his ideas would not be quite out of place in today's center-left political culture, but still). Same for, oh, Montesqieu, Mill, Voltaire, and quite a few others - enough to provide us with a CO2-free energy source great enough to fight back global warming . Unfortunately, such an analysis fails to account for even some modern and, I dare say, well-known names. Would anyone actually call Milton Friedman or Friedrich Hayek a conservative?

((I wouldn't ))

[ September 06, 2007, 21:37: Message edited by: The Shaman ]

 

Yeah, and that's the problem with attempting to craft these deep divisions, which is the real intent of the "writer." It's not really an attack on what someone believes but an attack on personal character of those who hold a different opinion. "Liberal" is just a catch-all target phrase for someone who believes in a different approach to solving social and political problems.

Inflammatory garbage such as this is intended to divide people - who would otherwise have a common interest - into "enemy" camps. Thusly, they can be divided and then conquered for a larger political agenda (see Karl Rove). Problems never really get solved, but the adversity continues over pressing issues, and that adversity can be exploited for political advantage - or in the instance of media entertainers like Rush and Ann Coulter - even personal gain.

But thank you for taking time to explain, LKD, and sorry if I misunderstood your intentions. As has been noted this appeared on our "serious" debate forum. So, I thought the topic was to be debated in someway. And sorry I jumped on you for trolling.

 

IMHO, it was meant to poke fun at the extremes that some attribute to both sides. when the most important creation is BEER, you know it isn't meant to be taken seriously.
some on the board take their political leanings WAY to seriously.
sorry to single you out drew however your post seems to imply that only those dumb conservatives could find this funny. i thought it was hilarious as it poked fun at almost everybody!
come on people, political correctness has went way to far when a simple posting like the above gets the poster called a troll.
1 thing(well ok, about the only thing) that rings true is the deal with liberals wanting their sushi raw but wanting their steak burnt like shoeleather! almost all my friends of that type do this!! i just can't figure it out. i like it all raw
yep , a diehard conservative who likes sushi(or as some of my friends call it "fish bait!")

 

That's very true, Chandos. However by mentioning Karl Rove I'm assuming that you're condemning the Republicans for using this "divide and conquer" strategy when, in fact, it is used across the board by both parties. However, to imply that only the "conservatives" profit from it is misleading. There are plenty of Ann Coulters and Rushes on the left who do the same thing. The end result is the same. The people are deceived while the Republic is hijacked by the politicians.

 

I wish I could agree with you Maurtag, but where in that entire thing does it say anything positive about liberals, or equally negative about conservatives? There's no "poking fun at both sides" anywhere to be found. Pretty much every passage compliments Cons as strong manly providers and decries Libs as weak girly-men.

It's not political correctness to call an insult an insult.

 

Nah. I'm not implying that only dumb conservatives would find this funny. I'm implying that only insensitive, ignorant, or mean spirited conservatives would find this funny. And I still stand by that assertion.

 

Martaug, of course one can't take this seriously per se, but some of the assertions are a wee bit beyond what I'd consider normal. Take this for a shot:

"Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers,
corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing. "

Not quite complimentary, I must say. Even apart from the innuendo words such as "crept" carry, this part shows an underlying theme in the entire thing - "conservatives" actually do productive work and "liberals" are try to "live off" the conservatives and do nothing themselves. I don't think that's reading it too deep and tbh I've seen cold-war-era Soviet jokes with less obnoxious (or absurdly wrong, imo) cliches.

So it's a joke? Sure, but that doesn't fix everything. If I make sexist or racist jokes in mixed company, I should not be surprised if someone is annoyed. Likewise, a political joke can rile people too, especially when it's not a very nice one. Well, all in all, I can't say I care so much. I'm annoyed, but I don't think I'll need to cry myself to sleep tonight. Speaking of which - ugh, it's 3:30 a.m. Cya people.

 

Well, I have to say I found the article good for a few good chuckles, and I’m more liberal than conservative. Although I have to admit that part way through, I wondered how long it would take Chandos to respond.

Of all of our SP members who have a sense of humour, I thought that at least DR would appeciate how over-the-top this commentary was, given his penchant for "the extreme". Oh well, life continues to be full of disappointments.

 

No, not really. I'm condemning Rove and GWB for it, not all Republicans. Believe it or not there are Republicans, and conservatives whom I can respect, and even vote for, if the planets are aligned right. That's the point, you just can't stereotype everyone.

Splunge - Just because it's over-the-top doesn't make it funny. Was it funny when Ann Coulter accused the wives of 9/11 victims of using their "dead spouses for personal gain?" Or saying that Moslems should all be "converted to Christianity or killed?" But who can say if she's serious or not? If LKD had thrown out an off-the-cuff comment no one would have been offended. But in this case I thought - wrongly, it appears - that LKD was just trying to stir up some trouble.

 

So Conservatives are actually...

The Village People!

And all together now,

I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK...

[ September 07, 2007, 15:57: Message edited by: Carcaroth ]

 

The lumberjack song? I never thought it's possible, but given the new batch of scandals, this "essay" puts a Monty Python classic gag in even more hilarious light.

Well then, that just makes it worth existing imo. Barely