the 2 sides to a hardcore-liberal

[sirs]

Following along Xo's accurate summation that an opinion can not be a lie (though it can be 100% wrong), I've concluded 2 sets of the liberal folk.  Please opine where I may be in error

You have the sincere liberal, which I'm hopeful is a majority of the liberal clan.  These are the folks that for whatever reason, just believe themselves to be smarter, and have this need to make sure everyone else is "taken care of".  For those who are not well off, they need to take care of the needs that they are assumed to be in need of, by whatever means necessary.  For those who are determined to be overtly well off, need to be shown the error of their successes, and the need to help others, by way of redistributing their wealth.  They just know better, so shut up, and follow their lead

Then you have the unfortunate minority of the power liberal.  These are the really dangerous folk.  Not only do they see themselves as superior to everyone else, they have a need to mandate their vision of what is to be.  They are in the ever pervasive need of obtaining power, in order to "legally" have others follow their perceived correct path.  These folks harbor an ends justify the means approach, to maintain power, and to project their agenda.  In most cases, laws are merely obstacles, until new legislation is applied that mirrors their ideological agenda.  And the Constitution?  Well, that's just some living document that can mean anything at any time........ends justify the means

Hopefully, the latter makes up a minority.  Unfortunately, the power they attempt to wield, frequently is applied to the vast majority (though not surprisingly, will often omit themselves from such frivolous restrictions)

Just my .02

[sirs]

Well, after Xo's & B's latest efforts at trying to rationalize the illogical, I was reminded of this post I provided a while back.  Sort of like a reaffirming epiphany.  Folks like Xo & Bsb aren't so worried about criminals, terrorists, or even an overbearing out of control government (unless Republicans are in the majority of course).  No, they're worried about us common folk.  We lesser educated serf.  They're worried, if not stressed out, at what we legal civilians might do, be it accidental or even on purpose.  They see the rest of us as a whole country of Zimmermans, scared to death that we are carrying guns, stalking, and just itching to kill people that don't "fit", and its their job to protect us.....from ourselves.  As twisted as it is, that sure seems to be the case, especially in how they're trying to villify and crucify Zimmerman in the public arena, before all the facts are in.

The good news is 2fold.  Far more of we sane folks to ever allow that to happen, not to mention we're armed.  And on a broader note, I wouldn't classify either of then as members of the "Power Liberal" corp.  I really believe they fit the mold of the "Sincere Liberal".  We just need to shut up, and follow their lead

Good luck with that     

[Xavier_Onassis]

You certainly sound like some sort of obsessed Zimmerman.

I am pretty sure at this moment, Zimmerman is regretting his monumental stupidity. while you are celebrating it..

[sirs]

Boy, wrong squared.  Not only am I not "celebrating" his act, not one time have I ever praised him, or stated how smart it was to follow Martin, IF that's what he did.  The thing is, I WASN'T THERE.  I don't know what happened.  I'm simply demonstrating the idiocy of the left in how folks like yourself and B have already tried, convicted, and condemned him, based on nothing more than he had a firearm with him.  That apparently makes him the evil one, and the gun his devil maker. 

Just helps reinforce my original theory.  Thanks.  But at least I don't think you're of the far more egregious power liberal faction.  I actually think you have a foundation of  sincerity......just that you couldn't be more wrong in your application.  Its manifested by how many times you've proclaimed how we conservatives should be shut up, vs being able to debate issues or debunk facts & common sense

[Plane]

You certainly sound like some sort of obsessed Zimmerman.

I am pretty sure at this moment, Zimmerman is regretting his monumental stupidity. while you are celebrating it..

What make you say that Zimmerman was being stupid?

Were his neighbors who were burgled stupid too?

Would he be smarter if he ere dead?

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is no proof that Martin was a burglar.

There is no proof that Martin was guilty of anything No one alleges this.

Zimmerman did two stupid things:

(1) He went on his self-proclaimed patrol armed with a pistol. Pepper spray was all he would have needed.
(2) When the 911 dispatcher told him not to follow Martin on foot and to wait for the cops to arrive, he did not heed that advice.

Had Zimmerman stayed in his car and gone to where he agreed to meet with the police, he would have been in no danger.

I am pretty sure he now regrets either of these stupid things he did. If he didn't, he should.

[Plane]

Absolutely no one claims that Mr. Martin was a burgular, or that it is anything less than tragic that he was shot.

I see you saying that Mr Martin had a right to walk that street, which I agree with.
But you are also saying that Mr. Zimmerman did not have a right to walk that street, which I disagree with.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Zimmerman may have had the RIGHT to carry a gun and to chase Martin down, but it was stupid to do either and doubly stupid to do both.

[sirs]

and even if one were to accept your premice,, which is pure speculation at this point, in this country, there is no law against stupidity, regardless of your Monday morning QB'ing

[Xavier_Onassis]

I think that you should be overjoyed that there is no law against stupidity, for obvious reasons.

[sirs]

Could count the minutes you'd pull that slur vs trying to debate.  Cudos to making that prediction come true, sooner rather than later

But to answer your query, I am, but entirely for different reasons than the idiocy of your inferrence

[Xavier_Onassis]

Even Zimmerman surely has to know that he was stupid to do what he did.

[sirs]

You weren't there.  He may have had a perfectly justifyable and rational reason (read: not stupid) for defending himself with lethal force.  The trial, if there is one, will give us that detail

[Plane]

  Which of these men was stupid to walk the street of the neighborhood he was living in?

  Mr. Martin or Mr. Zimmerman?

[sirs]

I vote neither