You are a liberal Bob, and even said so yourself just now. It's just that like most liberals you don't want to accept what you are, and simply choose to define yourself as being "correct". That is also incidently why so many problems today are not resolved, and we have the US at least divided pretty much right down the middle.
Let me put it into perspective here, "Gay Rights" is a big issue in the US. You will say "well I am outraged by *injustice* when I see such people discriminated against or by people who view them poorly", and that right there is what makes you a liberal. There is an entire other side to that which your going to inherantly dismiss as "stupid", "ignorant", or "based on debunked junk science", which in turn defines the problem and the conflict.
Without getting into more conreversial arguements, there is a central issue here of the rights of a small minority of people, against that of the majority. Regardless of the reason a lot of gay rights issues come down to the basic arguement that huge groups of people are being asked to not just tolerate, but to embrace a set of behaviors they do not like or agree with for one reason or another. Your basic sentiments are that the majority of people should have no rights in dealing with a minority group, and should basically have to suck it up, their reasons for the attitude being irrelevent to the equasion, this doesn't bother you, so everyone else should just have to deal with it.
The differance between tolerance and being forced to embrace something, can sort of be found in your "Hangover 2" review. Nobody was saying "OMG, a 'transgender' kill it" or anything like that. Rather you had people being grossed out and going on about how wrong it is, which a lot of people would agree with. Your arguement being based on acceptance, as opposed to tolerance, and there is a distinction.
I'm not going to engage in a big arguement on gay rights, and this goes well beyond that one issue, the point is that you (Bob) are most definatly a liberal, and also someone who I doubt could be reasoned with on such things, because you would defy any "reason" being behind the other side and go looking for any excuse to not accept what is being said, and that's true of a lot of things.
In general you put the rights of minorities of people, ahead of the rights and desires of the majority. You would argue that this is one of the principles the USA was founded on, where many people opposing you would point out that the country was founded in the spirit of democracy which is simply put an ideal of majority rule where everyone votes and whatever the majority of people support is what the society does (albiet we're a Representitive Republic, but still the spirit of the founding). It can also be pointed out that for all mis-representation of principles, the founding fathers were hardly a group of tolerant liberals, many being slave owners and everything else. It is true that we have progressed morally on a lot of levels, but in doing so we have created conflicts like this within the spirit of our society. For all their bold words about the rights of men, it should be noted that the founding fathers would never have tolerated a lot of the issues we have today by their very nature, and the laws, attitudes, and speeches were based very much on their somewhat limited point of view at the time.
At any rate, the point here is that even beyond anything else you support minority rights over those of the majority. You basically argue that tolerance is not enough, since simply letting a group of people exist and mind their own business doesn't matter to you if they are effectively treated as pariahs.... and that is an exceedingly liberal point of view.
Me, my sentiments go beyond any one minority group in the US. I actually feel that being too accepting has lead to a lot of the big issues in society today, and one of the reasons why a lot of problems elude a solution is simply because we won't single out groups of people even when we need to, irregardless of the nature of those groups.
I don't expect you to agree with me, heck I know we're pretty much political opposites on many things, I'm just saying that you are most definatly a liberal despite wanting to say your politically independant. Or more correctly your to the far left on the issues that come up in your videos. I wouldn't worry too much about it however (which I'm guessing you do, hence these rants), to be honest a lot of liberals in the entertainment and media fields seem to be in denial, which is part of why you see so many people saying that the overall slant doesn't exist when it does.
Me, I tend to actually lean more towards the needs of the majority and society in general usually. Like everything, there are exceptions, but I tend to be a realist in a "big picture" kind of way, even when it's not very nice on a personal level, and doesn't benefit me.
As far as all this stuff that can be said about "evil white men" goes and how "easy I have it" due to the fact that I'm part of the majority... well according to a lot of the math, us white dudes aren't going to be the majority in the USA in about a decade. All of our "racist" policies and principles, especially when it comes to accepting people from all over the world, and our fairly tolerant (despite criticisms) policies on border control and criticism have basically resulted in us ceding the majority to another group. In a decade by the numbers Latinos/Hispanics will outnumber white guys, and a few decades after that I expect this to be increasingly reflected in society. In my old age I expect I'll be at something of a disadvantage if I don't speak Spanish as well. Suffice it to say, from my perspective we're in for some interesting times ahead, and I'm kind of curious what liberals will do when they no longer have the "evil white majority" to point fingers at. I suppose we'll have to transition into a large majority of oppressors or something just to keep the political target of choice valid.
