Oh, please! Give me a break:

>Sure...
>
>Would you reciprocate as well and define what a liberal is to you as well then?
>
>Bill & Hillary Clinton, Jesse Jackson & Al Gore vs William F. Buckely, Ronald Reagan, Dr. Thomas Sowell & Rush Limbaugh.
>
>Bottom line as far as motivations from what I can see is that liberals see collective power (and themselves wielding it) as their prime goal whereas conservatives seem to want personal responsibility - evidenced by state's rights, enforcing laws, etc (though I think many of them too are quite hypocritial here..) To conservatives power is a means to an end whereas liberals eem to see power itself as the end. Right now we are witnessing Al Gore doing anything he can to gain power. Classic liberal actions..

I give you Tricky Dick Nixon and Newt Gingrich. Are these two liberals?

>Liberalism as demonstrated by the leaders of today's Democratic party and others like Ralph Nader see government as the ultimate arbiter of 'truth'. They tend to be extremely intolerant of those of a more conservative 'bent'. For example just today the 'tolerant' (gag) students at Berkely raised such a ruckus at Berkely that Benjamin Netanyahu was unable to speak at his scheduled time. All in the name of 'open mindeness'. They blame others for what they themselves are guilty of. Now hypocricy surely isn't the sole domain of liberals whatsoever but they have surely raised it to a new level. "No controlling legal authority" comes to mind.

I give you Bob Jones University.

>They see themselves as being above the law. Because thay 'care.'

Again, Tricky Dick Nixon and Newt Gingrich. To that, I'll add Ronald Reagan/Oliver North/Iran-Contra.

>Liberals tend to believe that man is evolved and that he (man) therefore has no personal responsibility to God. Exitensialism; the defining of 'truth' as being based on one's own decision process is a huge part of the thinking process. As a result any lie to further their 'truths' is acceptable.

I'll give you Ronald Reagan here. Did not seem to find the personal responsibility to God while in office to attend church.

>As Dr. Sowell suggests, they tend to think in terms of 'solutions' rather than 'trade-offs' which leads to all kinds of nonsense. They also tend to think of themselves as superior in their intellects and use them to belittle others.
>
>When challenged they tend to start making very personal and ugly remarks about those who would dare to actually questions them.

I give you all the remarks from conservatives about Hillary Clinton. Did you think I would forget the elephant ankles. *g*

>They are very good at placing their heads in the proverbial sand and, again, while absolutely not the sole ownsers of this trait they have an amazing ability to twist plain truths into wierd interpretations that stretch the imagination.

I give you most of the conservatives who have participated in this thread. *g*

>Now. Liberals tend to think that only they can be 'compassionate'. That's why they threw a royal hissy fit earlier this year when Mr. Bush started using the phrase 'compassinate conservative' as it is plainly clear in their minds that conservatives can in no way be both conservative and compassionate at the same time. They ride to their charity events in their limousines.

No, just the fact that he had to qualify conservative with the word compassionate.

>They seem to be constantly angry. Angry at life, conservatives, others, evil big business and any other group that might be in the way of their agenda.

I give you every conservative over the past 8 years while Bill Clinton was our President.

>Personal smears are one of their favorite tactics. They are often just plain mean. Read paul begala's more recent articles and you'll see this hate.

Again, I give you the personal smear campaign on Hillary Clinton.

>They are masters of hysteria. For example they hired marketing firms in Florida to call senior citizens and scare them by telling them that a President Bush would take away all their Social Security funding - patently incorrect to those who are paying attention.

Like the right-wing allegations connection President Clinton with Vincent Foster's death? Hey, I lost the copy I got from Jerry Falwell. Can I borrow yours? *g*

>Liberals tend to snicker at others a lot. That's because they see themselves as superior, as I mentioned above. They threaten to punish the rest of us by moving to Europe should G. W. Bush win the election.

Not me... I hate the French. *g*

>They are quick to play the race card. JC Watts was entirely correct to call the likes of the Jesse Jackson's of the world, "Race Hustling Poverty Pimps," which is dead on. Jesse Jackson, for example, is constantly inserting himself into media events and seems to have apretty bad case of camera envy. <g>

I finally agree with you.

>Now.. Does that mean that all who think of themselves as liberal are this way. NO it absolutely does not in any way whatsoever. I find that there are many many genusinely concerned and compassionate liberals. Tamar comes to mind immediately. She and I are probably polar opposites on many issues but I absolutely and totally hold her in the highest respect. Why? Because she applies her tenents first of all to herself, then she tries to arm twist guys like me. <g> I'd do just about anything for her I respect her to that degree.

I feel disenfranchised that I was not included. *g*

>Please understand that in my mind it is this ability for self delusion and a desire to force others into that mold that 'gets' me.

Better take a harder look at the some of the conservatives around you.

>As an aside... Do I think that many conservtives exhibit these same traits? Yes, I absolutely do and to that degree I'd disavow them as well, though I might tend to be more inclined to their positions.

Well, what was the freaking point then?

>Do I think all conservative positions are automatically correct? Nope, not at all. I think conservatives need a heart almost to the same degree I think liberals need a brain.
>
>As far as some of the areas where I have picked up my thinking process..
>
>First and most importantly I'd decide that personal maturity, character and spiritual growth was the most important goals in my life. I'd decide that regardless of what happened I'd choose good and willfully abandon evil. For me this must happen before any kind of positive, long-lasting results would be at all possible. A perfumed pig is still a pig. <g>
>
>I'd start with the writings of Dr. Thomas Sowell. Then I'd dig into the Federalist Papers. Read the Bible; it's good for your soul. I liked "The Road Less Traveled" quite a lot.I got involved with the Amway business years ago and gained a huge business education. When you're able to interact regularly with those who make 20-40,000 per month you can learn a lot. They know how to deal with bad attitudes and I used to have a horrible, victim pity-party attitude until I decided to grow up.

I KNEW IT! YOU ARE INVOLVED WITH AMWAY! I REST MY CASE!

>I'd read as wide a range of perisodicals as possible. William F. Buckely is hugely brilliant. I do like Peggy Noonan as she is not only a good writer but she has an ability to inspire as well.
>
>I listen to Rush Limbaugh as he's very funny and quite bright. If you snickered or felt ill here you're an intolerant liberal IMO. Doesn't Rush have the same right to his opinions as you do? Or do you just know better? If you think you do the I say, "Pahhh" to you you close-minded person. You don't have to agree with him whatsoever but you do need to give him the respect he is due as a fellow human being.....

I listen to him sometimes, then I try to go to his site to lookup a reference, but hey, YOU CAN'T SEARCH HIS SITE! I can do this at www.salon.com and www.washingtonpost.com, but not a Rush's. How freaking hard is it?

>There are many many good sources of information of all kinds on the Internet. For example I have the following bookmarked in my browser:
>
>CNN
>Drudge Report
>Fox News
>MSN
>Newsmax
>Opinion Journal
>The New York Times
>The Washington Post
>The Washington Times
>
>I also visit www.abcnews.com, www.cbs.com and other sites as needed.
>
>I'd surround myself with people who were IMO closer to where I wanted to be. I'd pray and get as close to God as possible.
>
>I'd expose myself to brilliant people, even if I didn't agree with them. I'd have discussions like this where I asked pointed questions like you just have (thanks BTW!) and put others on the proverbial 'spot' and expect the same from them as well.

I am here for you. *g*

>I would put myself in positions where I would be challenged (like this) so I could grow! Thank you BTW for asking me this question as it has made me think a bit. I appreciate that a lot and whether or not you and I agree on anything that's ok with me as we've had a chance to have a heart to heart encounter. Do you realize just how precious that really is? I'd bet you might. Even disagreements in cases like this if done with the proper attitude can be hugely profitable.
>
>Disagree with my observations about liberals all you'd like and that's ok with me.
>
>I'd endeavor as much as possible to always try to exhibit respect for those I disagreed with. Just good manners IMO really.
>
>I would make it my life's business to end my life naturally and leave a mark on others where they were inspired to love God and be the absolute best they could be in life. I very much want to hear some day, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant."
>
>I'd live life as best as I could and to the fullest possible extent.
>As I've said before I consider myself one of the most blessed men alive. I deserve none of those blessings at all and never will; yet.. they are mine.
>
>Joy.
>
>Peace.
>
>Love.
>
>Does that help?

No, you totally lost me right after the word "Amway". *vbg*