Typical Conversation with a Clueless, Self-Obsessed Liberal
I am given the advice to do my own research and criticized for not having my own opinion, but when I read research and the opinions of others and find value in them enough to adopt them into my thinking and analysis, that doesn’t constitute as having my own opinion or doing research. Maybe, it’s only research if I’m posting opinions liberals agree with. What do you think?
Why do you think the reason most people in academia are liberal? Could it be possible that most of the faculty and administrations of the majority of institutes are in cahoots with Democrats in the government? Just look at the teacher’s unions, it trickles down to grade school. Maybe it is true that liberals are brilliant and superior intellects (especially in comparison to Republicans) and that’s the reason they want to turn our country into a nanny state. After all, the intelligent liberals know what’s best for you and for everyone, as you will see argued subtly as this conversation progresses.
As you can see, there is no real rebuttal present, just an attack on community colleges out of nowhere.
She tries to justify her attack on community colleges to no avail. Then, speaking like the wise elderly woman she is, perched on her pedestal (let it be noted that this girl is in her twenties), she preaches life experiences and different perspectives. I’m assuming she’s trying to imply that just because I don’t agree with her political point of views that I’m less experienced and lack the ability or desire to expand my perspectives.
With a bipartisan government obviously implies partisan politics. Notice the personal attacks on my parents, unfairly used as an argument point. What I love most about liberals is captured by this girl saying “you have no idea what it’s like for people out there.” I’ll admit, I don’t. I am blessed to not be in a situation of abject poverty, but this girl hasn’t experienced it either. It doesn’t take much for a liberal to dig themselves in a hole when it comes to arguing, because they’ll project imaginary words and ideas onto you as if you said them yourself. Case and point, recall my comments and see if you can find where I say people should be tossed aside because some abuse the system. Did you find it?
Her comment speaks for itself. No comment on my end necessary.
Here is my favorite part. She tries to debunk my point of view, but not by addressing my point of view at all; she tries to hysterically laugh it off as if it were the most ridiculous comment ever. But if you read my comment (correction above: plan* not party), I don’t see anything funny about promoting or emphasizing private charity in our country or trying to solve the problem of poverty from within as opposed to social welfare and entitlement programs.
Then she continues with the “I’s” of her accomplishments in the department of private charity. Even in text, without any boastful emotion physically evident, you can sense a grandeur attitude when she’s describing her giving back and her desperation in trying to make a difference. It sounds like the private charity is more of an ego boost than a humanitarian gesture. (See my previous article on humanitarianism compatibility with conservatism). 
Most liberals are Godless which is why it’s so easy for them to stick it to conservatives using the Christian label as if it were an insult. Then, like a classic, typical liberal, she abruptly ends the conversation in which she claims was not a debate.
The ending statement from her is more of a personal attack than it is on my political beliefs. Would it be any different if my income was six figures? Should private citizens be mandated to contribute to society monetarily or otherwise?
