Super Happy Liberal Hypocrite Quiz!
sapperskunk
Posts: 684
So I was honestly looking for some information on Noam Chomsky because he gets so brought up here in these boards and I passed by this interesting fake/funny quiz. I'm not saying there aren't republican hypocrites, but this is hillarious and somewhat shocking. What do we think? The Chomsky questions are pretty crazy. I know its from a book, but if this guy's accusations were lies than these people would have sued for libelous/slander remarks right?
http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/doasisay/quiz.pdf
http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/doasisay/quiz.pdf
www.myspace.com/olafvonmastadon
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Not neccesarilym, libs have better things to do with their time...
<a href=http://www.topcomments.com><img src=http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r114/tcbm7/img/other/44.gif title="MySpace Comments" border=0></a><br><left><a href='http://www.topcomments.com'><font size="2">MySpace Comments</font></a></left>
Exactly. Like believing global warming is real.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
Unfortunately hypocrisy exists. I was actually shocked by the Franken comment 'I was glad when he was killed'. Of course, just because you have left leanings doesn't mean you love homosexuality, you can think what you want. But that's a bit much I think. I didn't know about Moore's private jet either.
And there's plenty of hypocrisy on the other side too. Stuff a lot worse than the above. When has Michael Moore taken an explicit stand on global warming anyway? I thought he was just about slagging off Bush.
Shiiit. Who'der thawt thaait?! I'm sure its just some dang liberals tryin' to wreck the great US economy
Because only 'Liberals' believe that global warming is real, right?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6096594.stm
The Stern Review says that climate change represents the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen. And on the basis of this intellectually rigorous and thorough report, it is hard to disagree.
Sir Nicholas Stern, a distinguished development economist and former chief economist at the World Bank, is not a man given to hyperbole.
Yet he says "our actions over the coming few decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, later in this century and in the next, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th Century".
Hardly a liberal.
http://www.chomsky.info/
That sites got a lot of information. No doubt the guys a genius, in terms of liguistics.
But doesn't his vast wealth and work with goverment DOD contractors kind of make him not so politically legit. I also heard he charges a shitload of cash per speaking engagement. I know I'd do the same thing, but you got to walk the walk also to be convincable and taken seriously, right? I can't see him better than any corrupt politican.
I agree, but in the end the message is more important than the messenger.
naděje umírá poslední
That's exactly the same thing my buddy said to me in person yesterday, when we talked about. Out of a group, we were split. A couple friends and I believed the message is worthless when the guy who created it can't even back it up himself. Then again a friend who thinks like you said it didn't matter as long as it's on paper. None of us were budging and I guess it depends on your personality type.
What if you don't know the person who created the idea? What if a million other people can back it up, and have exactly the same idea?
naděje umírá poslední
well, try and find a completely pious person nowadays. not gonna happen. we are all hypocrites, except for monks maybe.
so, the message HAS to be more important than the messenger, provided you aren't ted haggert, building your entire life based on a lie.
That's not what I am saying at all. I am saying all ideas are worth debating. The message is more important than the messenger.
naděje umírá poslední
nope.
i'm saying that if he drank a cup of non fair trade coffee while driving an SUV to work, it doesn't mean we should discount his views based solely on that.
But is it worth the time? Lets say I know a vegetarian who once in a blue moon or maybe just thanksgiving indulges in a little turkey. It's so innocent and insignificant it's not a big deal and I would still consider my friend to be a vegetarian. But Chomsky has gone so far in contradicting his views its crazy, I mean seriously he's essentially a member of the bourgouise and worked and gets rich through the pentagon. It's just so extreme, I can't trust him for coming up with good ideas or believing his commentary whatsoever. It's all a lie it seems. I think Chomsky might have ruined Chomsky.
I couldn't believe AL FRANKEN.
I couldn't believe it either...I'm guessing this was taken completely out of context. If you follow Al and his writings/speeches/etc., you could absolutely imagine this being tongue-in-cheek. He is a comedian.
Not when the messenger disproves his own message.
As I said, I doubt he's the only person with that message. There could be millions of people who actually prove his message and live by those ideas.
naděje umírá poslední
You cannot prove a contradiction. When Chomsky's political views are boiled down to their core, you find someone with a strong belief in freedom....but only his preferred brand of freedom. The latter contradicts the former, and it makes him no better than what he so often rails against.
That might be true, but then I still think his message is more important. His message then would be "I have a strong belief in freedom but only in my preferred brand of freedom" which is, imo, more important than the person who says it.
naděje umírá poslední
Perhaps you don't understand. You can't have a strong belief in freedom but then go on to demand your own personal brand of it for everyone. That isn't freedom -- it's just yet another version of fascism.
well by that logic would it be correct to say that we live in a fascist state.
It certainly would. But it would be also important to note that fascist states are not all equal.
its a wonderfull world, ist it.
Yes, it is, actually.
I do understand, but I don't see how this makes him more important than his message. I'd rather discuss an idea than its creator.
naděje umírá poslední
That is his idea. That is his message. "Be free, but only in the way I want you to." It's a contradiction, even before you start looking for any hypocrisy by the man himself.
Politically, Chomsky is just another in a long line of anarcho-syndicalists. He didn't create these ideals, he just rehashes them (albeit in a very eloquent way). He should be applauded for his linguistics, but his politics are worthy of reproach.