Username: Password:
Welcome! Please Sign In or Register

Liberalism

reviewed by Mathew Russo

A political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties.

Mathew Russo
10/01/2007

Liberalism 5

For Louie,

1.  I'm a liberal.  No one does my talking for me.
2.  I have plenty of ideologies, derived from ideas, which are for the most part--my own.
3.  I don't base anything on conspiracy--I prefer data, documentation, and fact.  On a side note, didn't the notion of Jesus start out as a conspiracy?  Or do we have proof of that?  Hmm.
4.  Fox news may be hurting CNN, but it cannot hold a  candle to Hardball.  And even Olberman is begining to trump Bill O'Lie-ly.  I better not say that too loud, or Billo might threaten to come to my home and kick my A**. Ha.
5.  I'm not a left radical tree hugger or whatever else generalization you made.  My ideas are more centrist.  www(dot)MathewRusso(dot)com.  One letter t is correct.  It stinks that you think you can damn all liberals on your warped views of them.  Your post is purely opinion, no sources, facts, or declarations of issue views.  Maybe -you- don't have any. : )  Your text comes off as if it were written by Rush Limbaugh--rather ironic since you accuse liberals of not being original.
6.  Which is worse?  That 'media nonsense' you refer to but cannot cite?  Or your post?  Answer:  tough decision.  I'll let other readers decide.  Even if I was a right-wing nutjob, I still could not support your post--it doesn't have anything not only credible, but it fails to radiate any sense of grip on reality, bipartisanship, or source citation or pointers to sources.
7.  Your post has the tone of a conspiracy theorist's post.  I think that's personally amusing, and I'll credit you for at least that humour and sense of irony.

Bravo.
Sincerely, Mathew.

Join to vote! 8 Helpful / 4 Funny / 2 Agree / 1 Disagree
Showing 23 Comments
You must be logged in to comment. login now.
louiethe20th commented 793 days ago.
Which is it? Are you liberal or centrist? You can't be both.

Mathew Russo commented 793 days ago.
You can't? So are you saying that someone who is a self-proclaimed centrist democrat is -not- considered to be "one of those liberals?"

louiethe20th commented 792 days ago.
Yes.

Mathew Russo commented 792 days ago.
For Aristotle... You wrote "I think your suits you wear there, could make you, to make a sense." That sentence doesn't make any sense grammatically or otherwise. If you don't write English fluently, I'll understand. Other than that, what you are trying to communicate simply isn't clear to me. I'm not sure what the perfect litmus test would be, but I have asked three other people to read it, and they have also said that you don't make any sense--and I'm not saying 'make sense' in the terms of agreeing on viewpoints--what I am saying is that you aren't making sense in the purest communicative sense. Please explain what you are trying to convey. Thanks. Sincerely, Mathew.

Mathew Russo commented 792 days ago.
For Louiethe20th: You have now stated that you cannot be a centrist democrat and a liberal. Then I have to ask you the following question: What would you call someone then who believes in civil unions for homosexuals, but also believes in the right for a person to own a firearm? ---M

louiethe20th commented 788 days ago.
I would call them confused.

numbah16tdhaha commented 787 days ago.
Dude, you have more funny votes than me right now! Hit the comedy circut, man!

Mathew Russo commented 787 days ago.
For Louiethe20th; Your comment "I would call them confused" tells me several things; 1. You cannot work outside your "pigeon holing network" of how you view others. That's sad. I would hate to limit myself in such a way personally--it really keeps you from getting to understand the world in which you live. 2. You are either against equal rights for everyone, including homosexuals, etc... or you are against people owning a firearm. I guess once again, a few things in life seem to fall beyond your scope of understanding. So I guess the only way you can deal with that is by responding with sarcasm. 3. I'm an issue based realist. I don't let a political party, a religion, lobbyists, or ranting lunatics on either side define or defy what I believe are practical views to our complex modern issues. ~~~Mathew.

Mathew Russo commented 787 days ago.
For numbah': You made a comment about 'funny votes.' Let's look at the numbers. In all my comments, the amount of "helpful votes" outnumbers funny votes almost 2 to 1. Additionally, I have rec'd 3 funny votes (consistently 3) on all my reviews and comments. It's a mathmetical improbability to receive exactly the same number of funny votes over such a wide consistency. So I did some more checking. Someone with rateitall has told me that the same three people voted funny on all of my comments. So that's not a huge surprise.

Mathew Russo commented 787 days ago.
For Numbah, Again: In preparation of your sarcastic response to the real math of the suituation of funny votes--let's talk about funny without the math for a moment. Now I really normally do not reduce a discussion of a topic down to photographs of rate-it-all posters, however, I decided we should lay all the cards on the table. Whether you agree with me, or disagree with me--I'm out there doing my thing, giving political speeches in all sorts of venues and places ranging from town halls to churches. My photograph is from one of these events. It's not a particularly flattering photo of me--but it's a real one nonetheless________________________. Your photo is of you half-naked holding a lightsaber. There is nothing more that needs to be said.

numbah16tdhaha commented 782 days ago.
Matthew, a personal attack? For shame, I thought you were above such things. For the record, the "lets mark all his crap funny" gag was not my idea, but when approached with the highly amusing idea it was hard to resist. Now Matthew, I have my photo because, well, I look alright without a shirt on and lightsabers kinda kick ass. I'm a geek and I think if I have the confidence to post such a photo it speaks WELL of me since it really says that I'm not afraid of who I am. You should take these things into consideration before you needless bash a guy who lets his nephews beat on him with the sabers. I really do think family is important and rather enjoy the company of most of its members so I let the little guys have at me. You can watch the videos if you like. Does my fun offend you, Matthew? Certainly there can be no real fault assigned to my lighthearted approach to, well, everthing, can there? Stop and smell the roses here and there, man! Let down this serious act! The snozberries really do taste like snozberries and if you'd quit being so serious all the time you might enjoy this fact like I do! Wow, that is the most nonsensical drivel I've ever posted, but I'm kinda proud of it...

Mathew Russo commented 782 days ago.
For Numbah:_____I wasn't personally attacking you. I personally could care less what you do in your free time. You talked about who looks funny, I mentioned your photo. If you like playing with Star Wars toys, then that's fine--may the force be with you. I'm not the mentally constipated serious robot you make me out to be--I do things in my free time as well, but that's just not the point here. I don't think me discussing the ramifications of the best way to digitally remaster music for well-known musical artists, and how my conversations with them--is the topic either. The topic of this post is politics--so that's what I wish to keep it to. I'm not attacking whatever you do for fun, again, it's just not relevent._____Going back to the actual topic of politics, I just get a little annoyed at people such as you and louiethe20th who have this "Pigeon-hole-istic" view of what liberals are. I have many friends both in the DNC and GOP--and although we always don't completely agree--we at least are able to carry on a conversation without insulting each other. Earlier in these posts on this page, I asked louiethe20th what he would consider someone who supports civil unions and ownership of firearms--his response was "confused." That's the kind of childish crap I'm talking about. Then instead of addressing issues, you yourself Numbah' make comments such as "Dude, hit the funny circuit." I also love the way you throw in your post "family is important" yet you, in the past, have made such negative/attack posts against me--hardly the definition of "leading by example" for any family, in my humble opinion. Anyway, the posts need to go back to the subject at hand--and that sir, would be liberalism. Thank you.

numbah16tdhaha commented 782 days ago.
Now my friend, I was off topic because you made it about marginalizing me as some kind of fool who should be left in the corner to play with his toys. I should be out in the open playing with my toys, but if you prefer a more serious image of numbah I have a choice shot of me in my Dress Blues. Then again, the last time I put that one up I needed a stick to keep the women at bay, so perhaps I'll hold off. As to your peculiar postings, perhaps you are not as severe as you seem, but when that's all you present, that's all people see. Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming. I don't think all liberals are the same. If they were than all conservatives would be the same and I'd be Rush. Now who wants to be that guy? I don't. I've called myself "right-leaning" but certainly you can have conflicting views from either side of the spectrum. For instance, I am VERY pro-gun but throw things every time the religious types try to legislate morality when the entire concept is ridiculous and the surest way to get any real American to do something is to tell them not to. At the same time I'm Christian, go fig. Now lets talk family. My mom and brother I would identify as "left leaning" but we speak just fine and most of my instances where I am in conflict with the GOP position are the result of a common sense idea that a conversation with one of these valued people has brought forth. Now, "Pigeon-hole-istic" catagorizations are inherently stupid and I think we can both agree on that, but I do think Louie is on to somthing with at least a general overall position. Mine is "right leaning," but it does not make every decision for me nor should it. So I guess I'd just suggest you claim something in that realm, vague though it may be, and stand behind everything leaving your mouth. I do, even the words that make me an asshole. You will notice I came right out and claimed my antics and I won't lie about the sole purpose of them being to annoy you. (which they did) What can I say, between the Marines and this Jedi kick I enjoy a certain clarity about who I am and what I do, and I wish the same for everyone because its a fun way to do things. By the way, am I still blocked?

Mathew Russo commented 782 days ago.
For Numbah;_____Why would you intentionally annoy anyone? That's...bizarre. (You stated your intent was to annoy in your last note)._____I think most liberal ideas are better than conservative ones--and after all, the country wasn't founded/discovered/taken over by a bunch of conservatives who were content with King George (the first one, not the fool in power today in 2007)._____Your posts goes on a bit of a diatribe about you, me, etc. That's not the purpose of this forrum. As for me, I stand by everything I believe in--and it's not taught to me from any radical view on either side, nor any religion. I'm for civil unions for homosexuals. I am for ownership of non-automated firearms. I am against abortion, but I won't legislate government control over a woman's body--hence I would leave it legal. I am also against captial punishment. I am for the war in Afghanistan--but I'm 100% devoutly against the mess we created in Iraq. In any event, my issue stances are on my website www.MathewRusso.net. One letter T is correct. This conversation needs to return to issues, and liberalism. It's not about you, your ligtsabers, annoying me, or what have you. If you want to discuss those topics of politics, specifically liberalism--and how it works--that's fine. Anything else I'm not reallly interesting in pursuing. Thanks. ---M

numbah16tdhaha commented 779 days ago.
Now you see, we're finally making some frickin' progress here. For the record, I take a somewhat more loose interpretation to the Second Amendment as I think it extends to howitzers, but that's neither here nor there. I am encouraged by the fact that you believe in legal gun ownership, though, since those "monster shouters" hated my guns. As to abortion I have recently adopted a policy that its a women's issue and since I don't have the relevant organs, I'll let them argue it. That one has caught me some static, just so you know. Capital Punishment... hmm... Still for it. As to liberalism, its a sometimes miswaived banner used by socialists and far stranger folk and that's why it catches the crap it catches, truth be told. Had you addressed that concept we might have had more to discuss! I hope that the main thing you see on my end is that I'm not completely inflexible nor am I one of the Rush followers. You have certainly distinguised yourself from the "monster shouters," at least, and I do think we could communicate for real if you'll treat me like I'm on the level.

Mathew Russo commented 778 days ago.
NUMBAH:Now you see, we're finally making some frickin' progress here MATHEW: I told you from the get-go to stay focused on issues, you've just decided to finally listen.__NUMBAH:For the record, I take a somewhat more loose interpretation to the Second Amendment as I think it extends to howitzers, but that's neither here nor there.__MATHEW: LOL. Read my piece on gun ownership on my website, www.mathewrusso.com. I address the gun ownership issue quite specifically.__NUMBAH:I am encouraged by the fact that you believe in legal gun ownership, though, since those "monster shouters" hated my guns.___MATHEW: Listen, you need to stop thinking all liberally minded people like myself are some group you encountered in the past. I'm not them, they are not me. Please get a grip on this fact already.__NUMBAH:As to abortion I have recently adopted a policy that its a women's issue and since I don't have the relevant organs, I'll let them argue it__MATHEW: Okay, then by YOUR logic, you have no right to discuss gay issues either, since (I'm assuming) you are not gay--do you let "them argue it" too? Something tells me you are vehemently against gays, eventhough you aren't one--and if that is the case--that invalidates your logic on abortion as well.___NUMBAH: That one has caught me some static, just so you know. Capital Punishment... hmm... Still for it.__MATHEW: Why are you for captial punishment? What does it accomplish that a prison sentence without parole cannot?__NUMBAH: As to liberalism, its a sometimes miswaived banner used by socialists and far stranger folk and that's why it catches the crap it catches, truth be told.__MATHEW: That's just your warped view of it--truth be told. By the way, what are 'stranger folk?' I think you are hedging your words because you are afraid to define yourself---and possibly risk painting yourself in a logical corner--of which you kind of did already with that abortion stance. Anyway.__NUMBAH: Had you addressed that concept we might have had more to discuss!__MATHEW: I"m issue based, always have been, and I've said that from the start several years ago when I began posting. My site also reflects each and every view I have--they were always there for you to respond to. CONT'D TO PART 2.

Mathew Russo commented 778 days ago.
PART 2:___NUMBAH: I hope that the main thing you see on my end is that I'm not completely inflexible nor am I one of the Rush followers.__MATHEW: I'm not concerned with "flexibility"---I'm more concerned with a more practical approach to politics and common ground--which is not refering to liberals as "monster shouters" or whatever else you have already repeated too many times that i don't care to quote specifically.CONT'D TO PART 3.

Mathew Russo commented 778 days ago.
__NUMBAH:You have certainly distinguised yourself from the "monster shouters," at least, and I do think we could communicate for real if you'll treat me like I'm on the level.__MATHEW: I've always treated everyone on these boards with two things: Respect and my mirror policy. Over a year ago, you continaully attacked me and my posts and called me names and insulted me. Unfortunatrely, you never knew one thing I stood for, what my views on the issues were, or anything else. CONT'D To Part 4.

Mathew Russo commented 778 days ago.
Part 4: I think three parts is more than plenty. : )

numbah16tdhaha commented 778 days ago.
...and, back to square one. I just said there was room for us to communicate! I was elevating you status with me from snide contempt to grudging respect and and then you had to go and trample the truce I was in the process of bringing forward. When I first came on here IJR and I were throwing things at each other, but until his recent departure we were cool, despite DRASTIC diferences in religious and political views, and ther is no reason why we cannot do the same. Here I am trying to cut you a little bit bit of slack and what do you do? You try to run all over my nutsack so you can act like you're winning some fight that doesn't really exist. I could give about a crap and a half about whatever disfunction you have, but its getting old and I can only hear the same song so many times before I stop listening altogether. Do respond if you care to join the human race.

Mathew Russo commented 777 days ago.
For Numbah': "There you go again..." to quote an ex-President. First of all, I don't know who IJR is, nor do I care. The very fact you are telling me you had an issue with another person might just be a little red flag that perhaps you don't "play well with others." As far as "battles" are concerned, I merely stated that I was "issue-based" and always have been. I've been on rate-it-all since the 2004 General Election...and in the past, you have made some pretty neferious and insulting posts against me without even having one ounce of knowledge of where I stand--that was my point to you. I wasn't trying to "run over your nutsack" as you so eloquently put it. In my last post, I discussed some issues with you--and once again, you are focused on anything else but the issues. Not to mention your additional blugeoning comments such as "do respond if you care to join the human race." You are in insulting person. I don't wish to 'battle' you as you put it (Maybe you need to lay off those lightsabers a while ya think?). This is a forrum for discussion of political topics--and I'll close with two points. One, I don't particularly give a damn what you think of me, it doesn't effect my views. You are someone who believes a Howitzer is okay to have as a personal firearm--I won't even begin to try to dissect that one--I'll let that statement you made speak for itself to other readers--and I'm quite sure they have already drawn their own conclusions. Second, as usual--you fail to respond to any of the political ISSUES I have mentioned. You can say whatever you want about me sir, I really do not care. I'll let the readership and votes of the people of this forrum and the free marketplace of ideas be my judge--not you. I'm not trying to judge you or insult you, but I'll advise you to the fact I have received many personal emails to this forrum already telling me that you are simply not worth the time in terms of responding, because you continually fail to discuss issues. One reader emailed me and said to me "Mathew, if you go into issue discussion with him, he'll only come back with insults to you--because he has no intention of issue discussion." I always give people the benefit of the doubt--but apparently, I was wrong and that person who emailed me was in fact right.

numbah16tdhaha commented 777 days ago.
Ah, so some have come in with their cloaks on to tell you about me, then. Shame that everyone kisses my ass in public, but that's my curse as a big dog, I guess. Let those people you claim to have talked to read this if you must, I'm sure it will be nice for them to see that I'm not fooled. Now, I extended you some courtesy and you rebuffed it in rather arrogant fashion, proving that courtesy is no longer an option for you. Yeah, despite all the high ground you claim to be standing on you are me, only less clever and not quite as honest. I am a jackass, and I know it, but I do have some ideas that I tried to discuss, and for as issue based as you are you ignored my positions and used them to attack me, the very thing you've been so judgemental of me for. You have also made a number of very unfair assumptions about me which I will not even try to de-bunk, because you have your mind made up about me and there's nothing I can do to remove you from this corner you have now painted yourself into with me. This is really my last comment on this really ridiculous string and if you want to continue any of your strange behavior, make some new reviews!

Mathew Russo commented 777 days ago.
For Numbah: Big Dog? Okay. Well I've met the Clintons personally (not in a crowd) and many other current politicians--on both sides of the aisle...and I do not recall you being in attendance at those events. I guess the Big Dog wears a small collar. That's my response to you in the same tone you have made your comment to me. As for the rest of your banter--AGAIN, since you don't seem to get it...this forrum is for Liberalism and political issues--not your diatribes of spite of me, or whatever else. You need to get back on track or find the proper outlet for your personal posts about yourself or against others. Thanks. Sincerely, Mathew
Showing 23 Comments
About This Reviewer
By the Numbers