Are Conservatives Just More Depraved than Liberals?

When I think of “sex,” I usually imagine me and another consenting adult or two.  I do have a little fantasy where Exador and Mack are in a bare knuckles fist fight which leads to hot man on man action which I watch while cuddling with the Church Secretary who whispers Walt Whitman in my ear which leads to massive smooches for me from all quarters, but I think 95% of us have that fantasy.

Conservatives, though, when they get to imagining decadence, they’re just… well

If an unmarried couple choose to shack up, that’s OK. If two peeps with the same plumbing choose to shack up, that’s OK. If more than two people choose to form a non-traditional family unit, that’s OK. Ditto with the views of the NAMBLA people, those special types of animal lovers and a host of other aberrations.

Bless your heart, Blue, but aren’t I supposed to be the dirty hippy liberal?  You know how many times I thought about fucking little kids today?  Zero.  Never crosses my mind.  Not me doing it.  Not my neighbors doing it, not the people at the end of the street doing it.  I know, intellectually, that those NAMBLA folks are out there, but I don’t think “that’s OK.”  And the thing is, I’ve been a liberal for a long time and I’ve never met anyone who thought that that was okay.  Nor have I met anyone who approves of people fucking animals.

I know you know that most Liberals aren’t kiddie/pet fuckers.  I know your point is just that we’re depraived. 

But you’re the one with the dirty laundry list, not me.

(I so want to work in this little tid-bit about Strom Thurmond, but it doesn’t quite fit.  It’s a shame he’s dead.  He’d got the perfect campaign slogon, “Strom: He’ll fuck you over all day long and then he and his wife will fuck you all night long.”)

14 thoughts on “Are Conservatives Just More Depraved than Liberals?

  1. “…but I think 95% of us have that fantasy.”

    I know that I do. ;)

    This is another case of extremist thinking. I see it on both sides of the aisle, too.

    It would be so wonderful if we could have a candidate who just thinks sensibly on issues rather than pandering to their party line.

    I dunno…somebody like…Giuliani?
    *ducks & runs*

  2. Guiliani?

    Ginger I keep seeing this recurring theme around the blogosphere.:) As you are ducking and running, do you want me to throw something at you? I have a few books, a skillet and a laptop sitting here. ;)
    Now, back to B’s post. I think when convervatives (or liberals for that matter) get into comparing the other party when such broad strokes and add in the depravity issues, then I tune out.
    Literally tune out.
    I don’t want to hear the words dimmocrat (talking to Bear Creek Lady here) or rethuglican, I am thinking that the dialogue just freaking stops and there isn’t any hope. That voter has made their minds up and are part of a collective mind-think.
    And I sigh deeply.
    I’m going to vote for the person who will try to end the war, values all people and, yeah, I’m a liberal so you get the picture. If people are writing about NAMBLA, there is no hope for a conversation and i don’t have the time or the energy to argue with them.
    I am not going to live in fear, I’m not going to be bullied by the Ann Coulter brain think and , once again, you get the picture …
    With that said, I need to have some more erotic fantasies. I’ve been so busy lately that I haven’t had any.

  3. One of the disturbing things about the whole “raping minors is the same thing as having an abortion” (yes, the argument really was that non sequiter) was that it provided a opportunity to fantasize at length about the raping of minors in a consequence-free world. Isn’t there enough of that on the Internet without providing another forum in the guise of having a discussion about abortion?

    Sometimes people sternly lecture about taboos because that’s a socially acceptable way to turn conversation to a forbidden practice that interests the speaker very much. I, for example, am offended by the thought of Exador, Mack, and CS covering you with smooches. Let’s concentrate on how unacceptable that is and talk about its social and intellectual ramifications all day, ok?

  4. Ha, no on Guliani. You can’t have that man in your fantasies at all, because just when you get to the good parts, you discover that he’s cheating on you with another woman in another fantasy somewhere down the block.

    Bridgett, good points all. I will wonder if there’s not something icky and empirialistic about me imagining men of all different races, creeds, and religions being able to overcome their differences long enough to plant a series of exploratory kisses all along my torso, men, who, in my fantasy, are all wearing fireman pants and smell vaguely of dirt and rosemary. All those broad shoulders and long fingers and thick forearms… Who do I think I am, just imagining the whole world should be available to my fantasizing?

  5. Well, some people like cheaters. No, the problem with Giuliani is that when you catch him cheating he’ll have one of his frequent tantrums and try to take away a few of your civil liberties in revenge, because it’s your damn fault. Ginger, all you have to know about the man is that a year before the September 11 attacks he had blocked public access to City Hall and had the place barricaded off so that you literally could not get in without being passed through by the police, because so many groups were marching there to present petitions.

    I have always considered that people’s ideas of what’s taboo tells us what they find secretly attractive. And I’ve always considered that people who would rather dwell on the taboo, and especially on the idea that someone, somewhere is violating it, are letting us know what they’d really rather be doing, thanks very much. That’s why persons of the cloth who tell you that religion will make you rich are so often robbing you blind, legislators who just have to come up with laws to fix this or that bit of (according to them) nasty sexual behavior are so often caught indulging in it, and so on.

    And B, so far Mark is the only person I can recall complaining about being in one of your fantasies.

  6. Mark at Dork Nation Mark? Well, we’ll just see how he feels now that he knows fireman pants are involved. He’ll be begging me to include him, I bet.

    And Mack says I don’t try. Look at the effort I’ve gone into to concoct this elaborate fantasy. Don’t try. Whatever.

  7. The real irony though is that BCM includes that excerpt in a post chiding someone else for making false claims about what conservatives believe.

  8. Ah, excellent y’all…I’ve been wanting to get some input from those of you whose opinions I value about Giuliani. I shall be read that article today, Editor…thx!

    It’s a strange feeling, being one whose entire core has always been right-wing, evangelical, Christian, conservative up until about 2 years ago…and then to suddenly realize that after all those years you were wayyyy out of balance.

    I want so much to be balanced. Not this kind of extremist thinking (i.e., the NAMBLA b.s., etc.) on either side. I don’t think we’ll ever have someone we can all agree on 100%, or someone who will be agreeable on each and every issue. I’m looking for a happy medium…the lesser of all evils, I suppose.

  9. Yeah, but here’s the thing I keep wondering about. What do you do when you suspect one side is incompetent boobs and the other side is incompetent boobs mixed in with folks who are actively harming the country? How can there be a balance with that?

  10. Ginger, you might also want to take a look at America’s Mayor Goes to America from the NY Times a week ago. Or ask me, some time when I have the time, to compare him to his (Democratic) predecessors and (Republican) successor as mayor. If you want to live in a place where everybody hates everybody else, then Giuliani’s your guy.

  11. But, NM, he cleaned up Times Square!

    …and gave the NYPD free reign to terrorize poor people and people of color and innocent people died, but you know…

  12. He “cleaned up” Tompkins Square Park, too. I lived around the corner at the time. Ask me about it some time. And ask me how a friend of mine, a nice conservative Irish-American Catholic girl, voted against Giuliani the second time around after she saw the park barricaded with cyclone fencing, barbed wire, and cops a few weeks after it got closed down.

    This man looks for enemies. If he can’t find them, he creates them. He lives in a state of permanent war. That’s why he was such an effective leader after Sept. 11 (not on it, because he had insisted, against advice that it was vulnerable to renewed attacks, in putting his emergency headquarters in the WTC) — he finally had a real war on his hands, and an excuse to ride roughshod over us all.

  13. This man looks for enemies. If he can’t find them, he creates them. He lives in a state of permanent war.

    If that is true about Giuliani, then it would make him eminently qualified for the office of Chief Executive. In fact, that sums up our nation’s foreign policy as it has been since Abraham Lincoln was in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    In a sense, it also describes a major difference between contemporary conservatives (as opposed to, say, pre-Civil Rights Era Republicans) and progressives. While Ginger and newscoma are factually correct– there is some extremism among both conservatives and progressives in U.S. politics– presenting that as an equation is a gross misrepresentation of reality.

    The founding documents of this nation were quite progressive for their time, and they remain so. However, progressives do not now, nor have they ever, held even a plurality of power positions in either the political or financial realms in this country. Our country’s history has been one long struggle between the progressive heart of the founding documents and the practiced conservatism of the documents authors. The greatest moments in our nation’s history have resulted from that progressivism taking hold; our darkest moments have come when that conservatism has shown its reactionary side.

    I believe we are in such a dark moment now, which is why we are mired in Iraq and why women and gays are finding themselves facing legal battles for first-class citizenship (it also explains where a sitting judge finds the cojones to wear his reactionary soul on his sleeve in court). The sad part is that for all the energy present in the progressive/liberal blogosphere, I fear that most of the nation is either diffident or tepidly complicit in facing this moment. The problem with that is that the conservative will is still vigorously exerting itself, and progressive attempts to seek electoral redress have not even provided a speed bump (that may have something to do with too many self-imagined liberals and progressives being too tepid and diffident in their electoral choices– *cough* Bill Clinton, John Kerry *cough*– but I digress).

    Anyway, enough of that bullshit rambling. I’m more interested in these sexual and erotic fantasies. I can remember when I used to have those.

Comments are closed.