Leftism is associated with violating social taboos, scrutinizing our mores, defending what appears to be indefensible, so it takes a lot of verbal skills as it can involve either sound logic or sophistry to convince/fool the people. I mean, a liberal would have to use a lot of word power to explain away child molestation or bestiality, but defending the status quo in regards to such practices is not too difficult.

It’s more likely that intelligent people are less likely to go with the conventional norms, because it usually works out for them to do so. This isn’t to say that liberal ideas are necessarily better (Though I do believe that as I am a liberal) after all smart people are perfectly capable of believing dumb things. & can better justify said dumb things.

& Out of curiosity how exactly would a conservative defend child molestation or bestiality?

Stanley Kurtz describes the leftist mind I know so well in Ireland. Defending democracy and opposing tyranny "is just too obvious – too embarrassing" for the sophisticated modern mind. The young modern leftist prefers to feel that only he understands the true state of the world – that the rest of the population is too "stupid" to see it.

The ordinary people don’t agree with him because they have their consent "manufactured" by the media – they do not think for themselves – but the leftist does. He can see beyond the propaganda and realise that the poverty, famine and tyranny in the world is caused by the West (rather than, for example, by the moronic ideas of the non-western world). Concepts like "The Free World" are the absurd and simple-minded propaganda of ignorant Americans who do not understand the world. The ordinary people deal in concepts like "good" and "evil". – Our leftist sophisticate understands how simplistic such ideas are, and how genocidal police states are just another culture, and not to be regarded simplistically as "inferior".

The leftist liberates himself from the ideas of the "stupid" people around him, and feels vastly superior to them. In the extreme case he will quite literally end up defending tyranny and opposing democracy.

The ordinary people have no irony. They just say flat out that America is "superior" to some illiterate Islamic theocracy, or some famine-wracked totalitarian gulag state. The leftist thinks they have never thought about it. In reality, they are grown-ups who understand all too well how the world works. The leftist understands nothing except the coffee-house world of safe, sheltered, protected, rich people.

Could this sum up why young people want to smash everything that is working perfectly fine, in favour of untried systems that won’t work?
Graffiti on a wall in a wealthy area of Glasgow.
Photo by JJ Gilmour. Other views of the same wall here and here.
Note the defacement of a beautiful old wall. Destruction of irreplaceable ancient beauty and heritage has been a main feature of modern socialism.

In a nutshell it is a double edged sword. We pit one against the other and happily sit in middle just like watching a wrestling match where we already know the outcome. I just do not understand arm chair quarterbacks.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/10/28/1-12/
The Defective “Liberal” Gene
"According to scientists at UC San Diego and Harvard University, people tend to be more liberal as adults if…they have a specific variant of the DRD4 gene

DRD4 is a dopamine receptor gene that genetic scientists believe is associated with an increased risk for ADHD, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

According to experts, the characteristic ADHD symptoms are inattentiveness, impulsiveness, and hyperactivity."

So does this mean the medical field will recognize liberalism as an untreatable mental disorder, and those who are afflicted with this defective gene will be barred from voting or holding public office?

"You cant fix stupid,
Stupid is for life."
-Tater salad

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/10/28/1-12/
The Defective “Liberal” Gene
"According to scientists at UC San Diego and Harvard University, people tend to be more liberal as adults if…they have a specific variant of the DRD4 gene

DRD4 is a dopamine receptor gene that genetic scientists believe is associated with an increased risk for ADHD, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

According to experts, the characteristic ADHD symptoms are inattentiveness, impulsiveness, and hyperactivity."
This would explain SOOOOOOOO much…!

Yes, Michael Savage said it best.

Do to the increase in extreme leftism in the U.S., this country’s founders are no longer seen by modern liberals as being liberal. Todays liberal professors now call the founding fathers the term conservative. Modern liberals, generally are collectivists and socialists. All of their denial in the world wont change that.

Also, classic liberalism (individualism in the 1700’s ) in America is the same as conservatism in its modern form. The founding fathers’ values and the Republican party’ values are very similar.

No, they are just interested in getting things for what they believe is free. They do not stop to think of the price that young women who have children without the benefits of marriage and a father for the child/ren will be paying because of the determining factor that there will be no social security for them when they become the age to draw it. Look at Nancy Pelosi. She is so far left in Congress. Her views of supporting illegal aliens with the tax payers money so everyone can be equal in her eyes is the basis for communism. Everyone is so blind by letting the government provide for them that they cannot see we are becoming the new USSR. Uneducated with children, and not being able to survive without a government check.

The most basic element of leftist politics is taking money from some people and giving it to others according to their "need."

Isn’t that called "coveting" in the Bible? Coveting means desiring something that belongs to something else, and taking it without working for it.

Doesn’t that mean the Bible forbids all forms of socialism and Marxism, because they involve taking things from others against their will, and giving it to people who covet it?
Jesus said only to GIVE out of your own belongings, never to TAKE from others against their will.

Ephesians 4:28 He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work,
doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share
with those in need.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 If a man will not work, he shall not eat.

You make an excellent point

Look at some of the evidence. Most of the Neo-Cons used to be Trotskyite Communists. The Neo-Cons believe in Woodrow Wilson’s doctrine of "making the world safe for Democracy." The Neo-Cons believe in the same version of history as the left and repeated the same criticisms against Thomas Woods’ bestseller "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" as the leftists did. The Neo-Cons admire Franklin Roosevelt and support the policies of LBJ (for example, they’ve started an Iraq War reminiscent of Vietnam and have expanded welfare more than any administration since LBJ; they also have doubled the size of the LBJ Department of Education).

Is the evidence correct that the Neo-Cons are actually a group from the far-left which has taken over the Republican party and the United States of America?

You are right to an extent, it did start out that way. Then in the 1970’s things changed and it became a far Right philosophy.

Look at some of the evidence. Most of the Neo-Cons used to be Trotskyite Communists. The Neo-Cons believe in Woodrow Wilson’s doctrine of "making the world safe for Democracy." The Neo-Cons believe in the same version of history as the left and repeated the same criticisms against Thomas Woods’ bestseller "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" as the leftists did. The Neo-Cons admire Franklin Roosevelt and support the policies of LBJ (for example, they’ve started an Iraq War reminiscent of Vietnam and have expanded welfare more than any administration since LBJ; they also have doubled the size of the LBJ Department of Education).

Is the evidence correct that the Neo-Cons are actually a group from the far-left which has taken over the Republican party and the United States of America?

You are right to an extent, it did start out that way. Then in the 1970’s things changed and it became a far Right philosophy.

whats the difference between the two? they both take away your rights. the left takes away your financial freedom by raising taxes across the board. and the with the left’s merge with environmentalism, they might start telling us how much toilet paper we can use or how much bottled water we’re allowed to buy. in fascism its the same thing, and leftists now are acting like just because bush is in "power" that means america is a fascist state. my rights havent been affected at all. i have more financial freedom because of tax cuts. the left doesnt like being reminded of stalin, does it? over 60 million deaths….bush didnt kill that many. neither did hitler, who the left considers "far-right". I consider him a nationalist socialist.
snoopy, if you know so much about how bush affected my rights, why dont you tell me how he restricted them? i have more freedom than under clinton, where i never had a tax refund. leftists restrict my rights with political correctness.
anoldmick, you didnt provide any answer to back yourself up. you need to consult a mental health professional.

Assuming you are actually interested in a response (and hoping the other responders are wrong), there are several parts to your question.

First, Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests subordinate to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on, but not limited to, ethnic, cultural, or racial attributes. A facist is a ruler with unlimited and unfettered power (with which he COULD be benevolent or malevolent, but chooses malevolence). A King can be good for the masses and the country, or simply act to consolidate his own power and wealth. arious scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism, authoritarianism, statism, militarism, corporatism, populism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, racism and opposition to economic and political liberalism.

Leftisim is not authoritarian. It is part of the political spectrum. It has no voice except in a democracy. Even in socialist countries (e.g., Denmark, with a figurehead monarchy), the people have the power to change their system, and choose the benevolent state.

I am, however, more concerned with your other assertions.

Taking your last point, Hitler was a facist. He insisted that power be vested, entirely, with him. This is why he disbanded the legislature and then replaced it with his own people. His policies were anything BUT socialist. They were elitist,. aagainst equal rights for other ethnic groups and religious groups. This fits facsim to a tee.

But more concerning is your argument that, because Bush is not as bad as Stalin or Hitler, he must be a good guy.

Well, Bush has been responsible for more deaths than Jeffrey Dahmer (cannibal from Milwaukee) and David Berkowitz (mass murderer from New York), and we certainly would not argue that Bush is not as virtuous as those mass murderers.

Similarly, arguing as some do, that what we do to prisoners in Abu Garib or Guantanamo Bay is justified becase Saddam would have treated his prisoners far worse misses the point. When we can justify our actions by saying, essentially "but we are better than the mass-murdering tyrants of the world," it misses the point that we, as Americans under a Constitution protecting individual rights and limiting our government, EXPECT more out of our government.

This is why, just because Bush has not killed 60 million Americans, people can rightly claim that he is a poor president (based on their own values system).

But the beauty is — it is also why you can argue that he is a great president.

Someday, historians will write the book. But for now, the First Amendment protects us all, as long as we protect the First Amendment.

A self-delusional, self-destructive, postmodern illness that cannot seem to make any value judgements for fear of committing the cardinal sin of secular leftism seems to have taken hold in our beloved American institutions.

What can be done to purge such a sickness?
shortbus, HUH???
wyldfyr, again you miss THE POINT

I raised my ire about this in the conference room at court and got a bunch of attorneys’ perspectives. Most favor letting A-Jad make an ass of himself in the US, because it shows the world that the US values free speech, and because Americans are still smart enough to know a madman when we see one.

The best thing I heard was that a Conservative student needs to ask A-Jad about his beliefs in the 12th Imam and how that factors into his plans for nukes.