Liberalism promotes:

advancement of knowledge
separation of government and religion
social and cultural progression
greater individual liberties
equality for all creeds

Conservatism promotes:

government regulated morality
tradition over progression
collectivism and conformity
fear and ignorance
disdain of science

70% of conservatives in America reject the theory of evolution, think that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, and that the Adam & Eve story is a plausible explanation for the origin of man.

People that stupid deserve to be beaten with a bag of oranges. Daily.

Didn't Adam and Eve ride around on dinosaurs like Fred and Wilma Flintstone?

Liberalism promotes:

advancement of knowledge
separation of government and religion
social and cultural progression
greater individual liberties
equality for all creeds

Conservatism promotes:

government regulated morality
tradition over progression
collectivism and conformity
fear and ignorance
disdain of science

Of course, this is mostly propaganda. I don't know how a thinking person could draw these conclusions so difinitively.


70% of conservatives in America reject the theory of evolution, think that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, and that the Adam & Eve story is a plausible explanation for the origin of man.

People that stupid deserve to be beaten with a bag of oranges. Daily.I have a better idea. How about require an intellegence test before a person can vote? I'm not afraid of such an idea. Are you?

Of course, this is mostly propaganda. I don't know how a thinking person could draw these conclusions so difinitively.

No propaganda whatsoever. History proves this rather definitively.

Conservatives burned witches for withering their crops. Not Liberals.
Conservatives persecuted scientists who rejected the idea that the universe revolved around the Earth. Not Liberals.
Conservatives are anti-gay, and for most of history, anti-woman and highly bigoted against minorities. Not Liberals.
Conservatives are obsessed with moral preachings designed by men who thought mental illness was demonic possession. Not Liberals.
Conservatives persecute individuals who do not subscribe to their ideology, to this very day. Not Liberals.

I don't know how a thinking person couldn't reach the same conclusions.

I have a better idea. How about require an intellegence test before a person can vote? I'm not afraid of such an idea. Are you?

It's a stupid idea, since IQ tests don't measure intelligence (which itself is not a static quantity), nor does it take into account the many complexities which comprise the reasoning abilities of a human being.

I'll stick with the bag of oranges idea.

Of course, this is mostly propaganda. I don't know how a thinking person could draw these conclusions so difinitively.

I have a better idea. How about require an intellegence test before a person can vote? I'm not afraid of such an idea. Are you?Fine with me. People who do well on IQ tests tend to be more progressive and liberal than those who do less well.

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/onlyhuman/2008/01/does-smart-equal-liberal.cfm

Liberalism promotes:
advancement of knowledge


I suppose. Can't think of any areas off the top of my head where liberals are trying to prevent that.


separation of government and religion


Definitely. One of their strong-points.

social and cultural progression


That's subjective. What liberals consider progress, rightwingers consider acts of satanic communist terroirsm, like gay marriage or brown people. While I may agree that they're a bunch of freaks for thinking that, it's still a matter of opinion.


greater individual liberties


Except guns and money. Since those are the only things rightwingers really care about, they won't see it that way. I guess they have a point that there's no single measure to say which is more valuable, the right to own large phallic symbols or the right to privacy or free speech or religious self-determination. They clearly think the former, while most other people think the latter.

If the liberals would get off the gun control thing, and stay off of ethnic or gender quotas, they'd do a hell of a lot better.


equality for all creeds


I don't know. "Creed" could include the KKK or the like, and liberals do try to stop their marches. While they may be, like all conservative Christian right-wing extremists, huge piles of shit, they're still entitled to the same rights as everyone else.


Conservatism promotes:

government regulated morality


Definitely. And they want it to be based on creed, not universal. They're ****ed.


tradition over progression


True by definition.


collectivism and conformity


Same. It's disgusting, too.


fear and ignorance
disdain of science


And those are hallmarks of the whole group.

Of course, this is mostly propaganda. I don't know how a thinking person could draw these conclusions so difinitively.


Some are true by definition, others are common traits in the people who choose one or the other world views.


I have a better idea. How about require an intellegence test before a person can vote? I'm not afraid of such an idea. Are you?

Only if I get to write the test.

Q1: The main reason that people voted for George Bush is:
A: Ignorance.
B: Gullibility.
C: Stupidity.
D. Other.

Q2: God is a fairy tale.
True.
False.

Q3: The Republican War in Iraq was started for:
A: Greed and power.
B: Other.

Q4: The idea of a test to "earn" the right to vote is:
A: An insanely stupid idea.
B: A brilliant idea! Nothing can possibly go wrong!

Sure. A test to "earn" the right to vote is a brilliant idea! There's no way ever that the people writing the tests would be a bunch of partisan hacks. Ever. Not in our government!

A distinction should be made between true Liberalism and the Democrat Liberalism found in America.

A distinction should be made between true Liberalism and the Democrat Liberalism found in America.

Which is actually oceans apart. Because Democrats aren't really all that liberal, in my opinion. Of course, I might be an extremist.

Which is actually oceans apart. Because Democrats aren't really all that liberal, in my opinion. Of course, I might be an extremist.I've heard it said that "extremism in defense of liberty is no vice." :)

No propaganda whatsoever. History proves this rather definitively.


Conservatives burned witches for withering their crops. Not Liberals.



Conservatives persecuted scientists who rejected the idea that the universe revolved around the Earth. Not Liberals.



Conservatives are anti-gay, and for most of history, anti-woman and highly bigoted against minorities. Not Liberals.



Conservatives are obsessed with moral preachings designed by men who thought mental illness was demonic possession. Not Liberals.



Conservatives persecute individuals who do not subscribe to their ideology, to this very day. Not Liberals.


I don't know how a thinking person couldn't reach the same conclusions.

Jesus Christ, how many things do conservatives have in common with radical Islamists anyway?

Jesus Christ, how many things do conservatives have in common with radical Islamists anyway?Just one - a conservative, myopic view of life and how you should be living it.

It's a stupid idea, since IQ tests don't measure intelligence (which itself is not a static quantity), nor does it take into account the many complexities which comprise the reasoning abilities of a human being.

Beside it would eliminate most liberals.

Beside it would eliminate most liberals.Being a member of several high IQ societies yourself, I would imagine, you've noticed how outnumbered you are by liberals.

Right?

Being a member of several high IQ societies yourself, I would imagine, you've noticed how outnumbered you are by liberals. Right?

Yeah that right, on this thread it is true. But than look at the title of the thread, it attact that side of the spectrum. I just happened to to surfing and couldn't resist a dig.
If someone started a thread title, 'why is conservatism better than Liberalism' would you go there to be enlighten or go there to poke a little fun?

Jesus Christ, how many things do conservatives have in common with radical Islamists anyway?

Sharia Law would be a dream come true for many conservatives.

Patriarchal society. No gays. No abortions. No premarital sex. No adultery. No feminism. Filtered literature. Government dictated morality. Religion is the law of the land.

The only downside is that it's Muslim based, not Christian (the difference is surprisingly small, but don't tell them that).

If someone started a thread title, 'why is conservatism better than Liberalism' would you go there to be enlighten or go there to poke a little fun?Neither. I generally don't bother with threads based on a false premise. Any statements that follow are logically true, no matter how contradictory, so there's no discussion.

Some notable conservative figures:

Osama Bin Laden
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Saddam Hussein
Fred Phelps
Jerry Falwell
All Religious Fundamentalists/Extremists

This list could stretch into infinity and it would be a who's who of human shit who devoted their lives into making other people's lives miserable.

Jesus Christ, how many things do conservatives have in common with radical Islamists anyway?

Lots, which is why they hate them so much, they don't like competition..

Hol shit! It's a liberal circle jerk. CA, don't put that in your mouth!

Hol shit! It's a liberal circle jerk. CA, don't put that in your mouth!

Well then stop trying to tempt him, put it back in your pants.

Well then stop trying to tempt him, put it back in your pants.

Why do they always resort to this gay stuff?

What makes them think we want to tap dance with em? Didn't they get enough of that in the Minneapolis airport this week?:D

I did Libertarians. I would be one myself except that I think they are clueless on economic issues.

Why do they always resort to this gay stuff?For all you know, I could have been saving you from eating a bad cookie.

Some notable conservative figures:

Osama Bin Laden
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Saddam Hussein
Fred Phelps
Jerry Falwell
All Religious Fundamentalists/Extremists

This list could stretch into infinity and it would be a who's who of human shit who devoted their lives into making other people's lives miserable.

Seriously. You would think that the GOP would be doing everything in their power to recruit Osama bin Laden and get him to join their party and all their exterminationist rhetoric to help solidify their plans to destroy all liberals and infidels. He would be a great friend and leader for the GOP, they share all the same ideals, they only differ on what fantastical God people should worship.

Issue Liberal Osama bin NeoConservative
Position Laden Position Position

Abortion Favors Opposes Opposes
Prayer in School Opposes Favors Favors
Separation of
Church & State Favors Opposes Opposes
Censorship Opposes Favors Favors
Pre-emptive Attacks Opposes Favors Favors
Interpretation of
Religious Scripture Not Literal Literal Literal
Women's Rights Favors Opposes Opposes
Death with Dignity Favors Opposes Opposes
Evolution Accepts Rejects Rejects
Invasion of Iraq Opposed Favored Favored
United Nations Supports Opposes Opposes
Gay Rights Favors Opposes Opposes
Contraceptives Favors Opposes Opposes
Sex Education Favors Opposes Opposes
Severe Penalties
for Drug Use Opposes Favors Favors
Corporal Punishment Opposes Favors Favors
Thinks There is
Only One TRUE God No Yes Yes
Dissent = Disloyalty Disagrees Agrees Agrees
Torture Opposes Favors Favors
Death Penalty Opposes Favors Favors
Execution of
Mentally Ill
and Children Opposes Favors Favors
Detention Without
Trial Opposes Favors Favors

It's a match made in heaven!

GOP + Osama bin Laden = BFF's 4 ever

Conservatives burned witches for withering their crops. Not Liberals. Yeah, I can see how witch burners from 400 years ago resemble today’s conservative :rolleyes:

Conservatives persecuted scientists who rejected the idea that the universe revolved around the Earth. Not Liberals.
Currently, todays liberals persecute scientists that doubt man-made global warmingConservatives are anti-gay, and for most of history, anti-woman and highly bigoted against minorities. Not Liberals.It's pro family values not anti-gay And women? Isn't it the leftards and their MSM dogs attacking a woman right now? Questioning her responsibilities as a mother vs her time spent as an elected official?

Conservatives are obsessed with moral preaching’s designed by men who thought mental illness was demonic possession. Not Liberals. yawn...you are stuck on stupid.
Conservatives persecute individuals who do not subscribe to their ideology, to this very day. Not Liberals.The persecution is taking place right now on the scientific front (mentioned above) on the political front (mentioned above) and of course, persecuting men for their personal beliefs..religious intolerance of the left

The NAACP will only support and defend a black man if he toes the lib/dem line

The NOW will only support and defend a woman if she is a democrat and is pro-abortion.

I did Libertarians. I would be one myself except that I think they are clueless on economic issues.

I leaned that way several years ago when they were first getting organized but the party has been largely co-opted by disaffected conservatives

Today they virtually ignore social liberty issues in favor of freemarketeering, basically they are conservatives that smoked dope in college

Seriously. You would think that the GOP would be doing everything in their power to recruit Osama bin Laden and get him to join their party and all their exterminationist rhetoric to help solidify their plans to destroy all liberals and infidels. He would be a great friend and leader for the GOP, they share all the same ideals, they only differ on what fantastical God people should worship.

True .. during the run-up to Iraq II some neocon loon dreamed up the word 'Islamo-Fascist" ... but when you do a side by side comparison between Islamic beliefs , Fascism and Neocons .. the Neocons have much more in common with the Fascists then the Islamics do ! :p

Currently, todays liberals persecute scientists that doubt man-made global warming

Getting called-out on BS is not "persecution"

For the great majority .. scientists hold each other accountable to very, very high professional and ethical standards. Tweaking research, or fudging results to fit the preconceived agenda of a paying customer is unethical and almost always results in some negative consequence.

The peer review system is used to keep scientists honest and to minimize publishing of bogus papers, which may be used to influence law or policy. The deniers try to side step this by setting up their own journals to publish or just publish un-reviewed white papers that end up in the WSJ editorial section or some think tank like CEI

On the subject of science. Conservatives believe that scientists are the equivalent of priests who spread the gospel -- and that science itself is nothing more than a new-fangled religion full of holes and contradictory explanations, and is thus inferior to time-tested religions such as Christianity.

Yes, this is hadit's actual opinion. Ask him.

Conservatives are obsessed with moral preachings designed by men who thought mental illness was demonic possession. Not Liberals

yawn...you are stuck on stupid.


Matthew 9:32-33; 12:22; 17:18
Mark 5:1-20; 7:26-30
Luke 4:33-36
Luke 22:3
Acts 16:16-18

On the subject of science. Conservatives believe that scientists are the equivalent of priests who spread the gospel -- and that science itself is nothing more than a new-fangled religion full of holes and contradictory explanations, and is thus inferior to time-tested religions such as Christianity.

Yes, this is hadit's actual opinion. Ask him.

Ahh .. The paradox of criticizing an opposing belief system by equating it to ones own ... gotta love right wing religious absurdity :nice:

No propaganda whatsoever. History proves this rather definitively.

Conservatives burned witches for withering their crops. Not Liberals.
Conservatives persecuted scientists who rejected the idea that the universe revolved around the Earth. Not Liberals.
.


IN a roundabout, yet painfully obvious way, you are condemning the Catholic Church of it's past injustices and claiming that conservatism disdains religion. You also cite history as proof of your assertions.

On the topic of "conservatism" persecuting those who believed in a heliocentric view of the universe as opposed to a geocentric view, we have to look at the story; the whole story that is.

Lets take a closer look at how it really went down between Galileo Galilei, Pope Urban VII and the catholic Church.

Galileo was commissioned by Pope Urban VIII to write a paper/book on the topic (not his first, nor his last). He was to meet certain criteria. Most importantly, he was to take no personal position one way or another, but to in effect, debate the subject and argue points for both views, while also including the Pope's personal views on the subject, which was a geocentric view of the universe. The readers could decide for themselves.

It was published in 1632 and was titled "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" after Church authorities requested that the original title, "Dialogue on the Tides" was basically rejected. The writing basically explains two opposing views of our place in the universe; the heliocentric view vs the geocentric view, or the Copernican view vs the standard accepted view of the science of that particular time. It was written as a conversation between three distinct individuals who debated the pros and cons of the two views and the evidence supporting or disproving their positions.

The idea of heliocentrism was nothing at the time, it just wasn't yet embraced by science. In fact, it is known that it was being debated at least as early as the time of Aristotle (who believed in the geocentric view and put his views on paper). In Galileo's time the scientific consensus leaned heavily toward geocentrism and Galileo was taking on a huge powerful institution by releasing that particular work. It should be noted that the work was commissioned by, and funded by the Church.

Galileo most definitely got into trouble when he published the book, but not because of the position he seemed to favor regarding heliocentrism. That was just a reason to get him in front of the Inquisition. The fact is, the Pope was insulted because Galileo put the Pope's words (which held to the geocentric view) into the mouth of a fictitious character named Simplicius. When the Pope found out, he was angry, as well as insulted and called on Galileo to come to Rome and defend his position.

The Pope had been Galileo's friend, benefactor, defender and a financier. He felt betrayed and was very upset that his friend had publicly humiliated him. He could have had him executed for heresy had he wanted to. he could have made him recant under torture had he wanted to, but he did not.

Galileo WAS punished. He was ordered to do penance, but they allowed his sister (who was a nun at the time) to do it for him, because she spent much of her time praying anyway. He was also placed placed under house arrest in a luxurious home, was given a pension and all of his future research continued to be funded by the Church up to the time of his death.

Pope Urban VIII had been funding Galileo even before he became Pope, but he had to do something in response to what he considered slander, as any King, Noble or other blue blood would have to have done. People were made examples of in those days. house arrest was a rarity, and prisons were more or less holding cells for prisoners awaiting execution. There was no real penal system to speak of, or rehabilitation system that fits any definition comparable to the modern world.

In the days of 15th century Europe, people just weren't allowed to slander their King, Queen, or those higher up in society. Many people had been executed for far less than what Galileo did.

Galileo was convicted of heresy. There is no doubt about it, but he also remained a devout Catholic for the rest of his life after recanting his heretical position. Ironically, the Church never formally denounced the heliocentric model of the universe

Galileo's big mistake was writing a few lines that made the Pope look foolish and breaking his promise to his friend.

As time went on and the telescope became more available to more people; especially those in the scientific community.

Here's a quote on the subject by Pope John Paul II.

" Thanks to his intuition as a brilliant physicist and by relying on different arguments, Galileo, who practically invented the experimental method, understood why only the sun could function as the centre of the world, as it was then known, that is to say, as a planetary system. The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world’s structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture…” – Pope John Paul II, L’Osservatore Romano N. 44 (1264) - 4th November, 1992".


Interestingly, Pope John Paul II was a true conservative Catholic, and appointed more (conservative) Cardinals than any Pope in history.

Yet, he also stated openly that the theory of evolution in no way contradicts hole scripture and/or holy tradition. He maintained that God could use whatever method God wanted to create and allow life to evolve.

He even stated that there is no "place" called hell, but that hell was a state of being as opposed to a physical place.

The Church has pursued science for centuries, and has also produced some of the most well educated people in the world ( for instance, it's not easy to become a Jesuit because of the extremely high standards of education required to do so). But, what they set out to do, they often do over long periods of time and with intense research and scrutiny. This applies not only to science and a whole litany (no pun intended) of other topics, but to the supernatural as well.

A possible miracle takes years and years to be deemed authentic. Any report of an alleged miracle has to be intensely scrutinized and well researched. This is so they get it right, and as a body, the Church is very patient with these things. The same goes for the Canonization of a Saint. It's a very long process, and almost always requires some miraculous event to take place through the intercession of a Saint in order for the process to reach it's end. Not everyone who's cause is put up for sainthood makes it. In fact; most do not.

So, you're argument about liberalism being better than conservatism isn't quite accurate, and if there is an exception to one of your assertions, then they all must be questioned.

Just FYI, the Salem Witch Trials were Puritans, not Catholics. Also, the Church, prior to the split between Protestent and Catholic, burned whole libraries of science and art that they disapproved of.

Just FYI, the Salem Witch Trials were Puritans, not Catholics. Also, the Church, prior to the split between Protestent and Catholic, burned whole libraries of science and art that they disapproved of.


Yes, exactly like today’s conservatives :|

Yes, exactly like today’s conservatives :|

Thanks to Liberalism, conservative influence is greatly reduced from what it was centuries ago. Otherwise America would be a religious dictatorship easily on par with anything found in the Middle East.

You owe your freedom to Liberals.

Just FYI, the Salem Witch Trials were Puritans, not Catholics. Also, the Church, prior to the split between Protestent and Catholic, burned whole libraries of science and art that they disapproved of.

Yeah, they were, but the reference to "disdain for science" and the geocentric vs heliocentric view of the solar system occurred long before the time of the Salem settlers, and they weren't even Americans anyway. They were British separatists still under the control of the crown. They have nothing whatsoever to do with today's Americans.


We can't compare today's liberals or conservatives to people who lived hundreds of years ago, because both are relative terms. You can't even compare liberals and conservatives under some different forms of government, because they have different meanings, depending upon what governments are in question.

Am American conservative would never dream of supporting socialism or communism, but a Soviet conservative would. A soviet conservative would be a communist at heart, and desire that the state own everything, control every industry and create a so called "workers paradise". An American conservative wants th government as far removed from society and the personal lives of Americans as possible.



Conservatism is the belief that staying with the original plan laid down to form the government is a wise course of action, especially American government, because no nation has ever come up with anything like it. It is historically unique.

When the Soviet union fell, conservatives were the communists, but in America, they're the absolute antithesis of communists. These are relative terms and have to be put in their proper context in o9rder to be discussed sensibly.

Thanks to Liberalism, conservative influence is greatly reduced from what it was centuries ago. Otherwise America would be a religious dictatorship easily on par with anything found in the Middle East.

You owe your freedom to Liberals.Society has become only more liberal since civilization began. We have quite a ways to go, though. What we call conservatism is doomed by its inability to adapt to change.

It's just a matter of time and surviving the risk conservatives pose to all of us in the meantime.

Society has become only more liberal since civilization began. We have quite a ways to go, though. What we call conservatism is doomed by its inability to adapt to change.

It's just a matter of time and surviving the risk conservatives pose to all of us in the meantime.

No, it's just that what's called liberal now will be called conservative by our grandkids. "Conservative" basically means "afraid of change", but there's no stable base-line for it. The base-line changes with each generation. Whatever progress liberals make today, conservatives will sustain tomorrow.

Yes, within a few decades conservatives will take a position that homo-hate is an outdated embarrassment to modern conservative values. Bigotry is relatively short-lived and entirely dependent on the bigoted generation that sustains them.

Strom Thurmond is dead. Blacks are welcome in the conservative party.

I'd very much like to see someone on the conservative side make a counter thread explaining why Conservatism is better than Liberalism.

I believe we are hardwired at birth to have either a left or right POV. The way we start out is influenced during our formative years by our environment.

I have all the makings of the stereotypical rightie - above average intelligence, organized, conscientious, responsible, strong work ethic and such. If I had remained sheltered and existed in a comfortable cocoon or reacted inappropriately under adverse circumstances as I developed I might have been an archconservative today,

But that isn't the way things turned out. My attributes were complemented by the effect of broader life experiences that molded my initial point of view and a social maturity resulted that many seem to lack.

I can only speak for myself, but I strongly suspect that our political persuasions indicate the extent of our social maturity.

A distinction should be made between true Liberalism and the Democrat Liberalism found in America.Oh, I see...but no distinction should be made between Republican Conservatism and those who burned witches 400 years ago? Hilarious.

It's a stupid idea, since IQ tests don't measure intelligence (which itself is not a static quantity), nor does it take into account the many complexities which comprise the reasoning abilities of a human being.
Hmmm...that's interesting. Then let's have a simple knowledge test. Some minimal knowledge of American history, constitution, and workings of the government. How does that sound?

I believe we are hardwired at birth to have either a left or right POV. The way we start out is influenced during our formative years by our environment.

I have all the makings of the stereotypical rightie - above average intelligence, organized, conscientious, responsible, strong work ethic and such. If I had remained sheltered and existed in a comfortable cocoon or reacted inappropriately under adverse circumstances as I developed I might have been an archconservative today,

But that isn't the way things turned out. My attributes were complemented by the effect of broader life experiences that molded my initial point of view and a social maturity resulted that many seem to lack.

I can only speak for myself, but I strongly suspect that our political persuasions indicate the extent of our social maturity.

Those qualities have nothing to do with conservatism. In fact, there was a study done that showed that liberals on average have higher IQ's than conservatives. Organization, conscientious, responsible, strong work ethic, are also personality characteristics that are separate from political beliefs.

I do agree with you that we're either hard wired from birth or something happens in our formative years that tend to solidify our POV. Almost all conservative positions are born out of fear and/or a desire for security. Almost all liberal beliefs are born out of a desire for equality and/or freedom. How this happens, I'm not exactly sure. But it's easy to examine the root of all conservative beliefs and see that underneath them all, there is a certain kind of fear. Fear of change, fear of the unknown, fear of loosing security. This is why conservatives tend to gravitate towards policies and politics that are slightly more heavy handed, less nuanced, more black and white, and more authoritarian in nature because those tend to fulfill a need, they soothe and provide comfort to their inner fears. Also, it's easier to be a conservative than to be a liberal. Less effort is required to be a conservative, and since comforting fear is the main priority they take the path of the least resistance, like water.

Politics, especially in this country, will teach you more about human behavior and psychology than any book or class could hope to teach.

Oh, I see...but no distinction should be made between Republican Conservatism and those who burned witches 400 years ago? Hilarious.

A distinction could be made, but there's so little difference, what's the point?

A distinction could be made, but there's so little difference, what's the point?Have you been a complete bullshit artist your whole life?

Almost all conservative positions are born out of fear and/or a desire for security. Almost all liberal beliefs are born out of a desire for equality and/or freedom.That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read. In my view, reality is actually exactly opposite of what you've said.

Why is it that liberals want to control everything...from which cars automakers can build, to which foods you can eat (see NYC's ban on transfats and Chicago's former ban on Foie Gras), to which gun you can own (if they'll let you own one at all), to which thoughts you're allowed to have (see the various "hate crimes" laws)? Can you explain how any of that equates to more "freedom"?

That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read. In my view, reality is actually exactly opposite of what you've said.

I fully expect you to reject it, but that's ok. Rejection is the first step to acceptance. Let it sink in over time.

Why is it that liberals want to control everything...from which cars automakers can build, to which foods you can eat (see NYC's ban on transfats and Chicago's former ban on Foie Gras), to which gun you can own (if they'll let you own one at all), to which thoughts you're allowed to have (see the various "hate crimes" laws)? Can you explain how amu of that equates to more "freedom"?

1. Liberals do not want to control "everything."
2. Both liberals and conservatives alike support energy efficient, environmentally friendly cars. This is a matter of protecting our planet.
3. NYC's ban on transfats is not a "liberal" position.
4. Get off the gun control thing, you are starting to worry me. I believe people have the right to own a gun for protection.
5. Thought crimes? You've gone off the deep end.

Also, don't confuse the democratic party with liberalism - they are NOT liberal.

1. Liberals do not want to control "everything." No? Could have fooled me.

2. Both liberals and conservatives alike support energy efficient, environmentally friendly cars. This is a matter of protecting our planet.Supporting energy efficiency is different than forcing it through legislation. Conservatives believe individuals should have the freedom to make their own choices. Liberals believe people are too stupid and must be told what to do.

3. NYC's ban on transfats is not a "liberal" position.No? Who controls NYC? Conservatives? Give me a break...


4. Get off the gun control thing, you are starting to worry me. I believe people have the right to own a gun for protection.You do, but that's not a typical liberal position...and you know it.


5. Thought crimes? You've gone off the deep end.Have I? Why is it more illegal to harm a person based on their race than it is to just harm a person? The only difference is the thoughts that are behind the crime. Therefore, the thought must be the crime.

Also, don't confuse the democratic party with liberalism - they are NOT liberal.Nor are Republicans "conservative". There you have it.

Oh, I see...but no distinction should be made between Republican Conservatism and those who burned witches 400 years ago? Hilarious.

You can absolutely make a distinction between Political Conservatism and general Conservatism. It's just so happens that Political Conservatives are typically also cultural and social conservatives, steeped in religious dogma.

So where is the real distinction?

You can absolutely make a distinction between Political Conservatism and general Conservatism. It's just so happens that Political Conservatives are typically also cultural and social conservatives, steeped in religious dogma.

So where is the real distinction?

I don't know any modern-day conservatives that want to burn witches. Maybe you can find some?

If they could do it without fear of punishment, you bet your ass there would be mobs of conservatives burning wiccans and other "undesirables." Check out footage of rabid muslims stoning and beating women for committing adultery, there's little difference between them and the conservative behavior of our past. The difference is, back then they could get away with it. It was accepted.

I don't know any modern-day conservatives that want to burn witches. Maybe you can find some?

RSwZJ55g80Q

You were saying?

Hmmm...that's interesting. Then let's have a simple knowledge test. Some minimal knowledge of American history, constitution, and workings of the government. How does that sound?It sounds to me like naturalized citizens would be the largest voting bloc.

A distinction could be made, but there's so little difference, what's the point?the point is on top of your head if you really believe what you just said

the point is on top of your head if you really believe what you just said

Wow, you're a poet and you didn't even know it!

He took his time and made a rhyme.

If they could do it without fear of punishment, you bet your ass there would be mobs of conservatives burning wiccans and other "undesirables." Check out footage of rabid muslims stoning and beating women for committing adultery, there's little difference between them and the conservative behavior of our past. The difference is, back then they could get away with it. It was accepted.What a load of bullshit. I don't even know where to start.

RSwZJ55g80Q

You were saying?

I see. So, you think a barn full of hillbillies represents modern conservatism? Is that right? Just goes to show you how out-of-touch with reality you are.

What was all of that I hear you guys saying about how conservatives rely on "fear" to control the population? It seems to me that you're trying to pump up fear of conservatives by plucking out one extreme example and attempting to paint everyone with the same brush.

Perhaps you think the opinions expressed in that video should be illegal to utter?

So, you think a barn full of hillbillies represents modern conservatism?

I'd say that a country full of gullible moronic retards and halfwits represents "modern conservatism", whatever that's supposed to mean.

I'd say that a country full of gullible moronic retards and halfwits represents "modern conservatism", whatever that's supposed to mean.What makes halfwits more suseptible to modern conservatism rather than modern liberalism?

I listened to both Obama's and McCain's acceptance speeches. Obama clearly was attempting to dupe people to vote for him by promising the moon and the stars and the sky. McCain didn't.

Obama can't accomplish half of the stuff he's advocated. I'm sure he probably knows that. But, that won't stop him from trying to buy your vote with your own money. Now who is gullible?

Those qualities have nothing to do with conservatism. In fact, there was a study done that showed that liberals on average have higher IQ's than conservatives. Organization, conscientious, responsible, strong work ethic, are also personality characteristics that are separate from political beliefs.

I do agree with you that we're either hard wired from birth or something happens in our formative years that tend to solidify our POV. Almost all conservative positions are born out of fear and/or a desire for security. Almost all liberal beliefs are born out of a desire for equality and/or freedom. How this happens, I'm not exactly sure. But it's easy to examine the root of all conservative beliefs and see that underneath them all, there is a certain kind of fear. Fear of change, fear of the unknown, fear of loosing security. This is why conservatives tend to gravitate towards policies and politics that are slightly more heavy handed, less nuanced, more black and white, and more authoritarian in nature because those tend to fulfill a need, they soothe and provide comfort to their inner fears. Also, it's easier to be a conservative than to be a liberal. Less effort is required to be a conservative, and since comforting fear is the main priority they take the path of the least resistance, like water.

Politics, especially in this country, will teach you more about human behavior and psychology than any book or class could hope to teach.Perhaps those higher IQs relieve liberals of some of that fear. While they are more aware and alert to what is around them, they also have the intellectual capacity to understand it, keep it in context and made appropriate associations. They lack the fear that comes from the unknown for some people because they simply know more.

Those who go through life riddled with fear do so out of either a lack of understanding of what's going on, or misunderstanding what they perceive to be going on.

I wish they'd be still and quit obstructing those better qualified to make informed decisions about that which promotes the common welfare, which is the umbrella that covers the fundamental purpose of government.

What makes halfwits more suseptible to modern conservatism rather than modern liberalism?

Halfwits tend to immerse themselves in fear and resentment, and are easier to persuade by means of shallow empty flattery.

These themes (1. fear of commies, terrorists, muslims, etc.; 2. resentment of "elitists," people who are "different"; and 3. flattery -- us Americans are unquely blessed, superior, virtuous, etc.) are the three pillars of Republican politics in America.

Education and information lead to liberalism.

Education and information lead to liberalism.And vice versa. Liberals educate themselves by seeking out information.

Education and information lead to liberalism.

Liberalism is based on Age of Enlightenment values: A progression away from aristocracy, plutocracy, theocracy, superstition and oppression towards rationality, science, rights for common people, consolidation of government and education

250 years later .. and you still see these contrasting values reflected in the arguments from either side of the political spectrum

Halfwits tend to immerse themselves in fear and resentment, and are easier to persuade by means of shallow empty flattery.

These themes (1. fear of commies, terrorists, muslims, etc.; 2. resentment of "elitists," people who are "different"; and 3. flattery -- us Americans are unquely blessed, superior, virtuous, etc.) are the three pillars of Republican politics in America.Hahaha!! I just saw Mr. Obama two weeks ago promise to fix the economy, strengthen the military, end the war, spend billions on alternative energy, billions on infrastructure, billions on healthcare, AND cut your taxes. I'd say that those people who are pursuaded by those claims are the dimwits.

Education and information lead to liberalism.I think what you mean is "indoctrination" leads to liberalism. That's essentially what our public school system is. Somehow, I survived the public school system and college...yet I'm still a conservative. Funny.

In any case...I think I will change to a liberal. Life is too hard. I'm tired of working. I'd like the taxpayers to support me for a while...buy me a new house...give me "free" healthcare too. Liberalism doesn't require any thought either. That will be a great relief to me...just "feel". If I "feel" there is an injustice, all I need to do is wish for the government toothfairy to come along and fix it.

Oh, and I only want people who make more than I do to pay taxes. YES!! I'm totally a liberal now!!!

Hahaha!! I just saw Mr. Obama two weeks ago promise to fix the economy, strengthen the military, end the war, spend billions on alternative energy, billions on infrastructure, billions on healthcare, AND cut your taxes. I'd say that those people who are pursuaded by those claims are the dimwits.He didn't say he'd cut everybody's taxes. He was speaking to most of America.

For the other five percent, the discount tickets to life are over.

I think what you mean is "indoctrination" leads to liberalism. That's essentially what our public school system is. Somehow, I survived the public school system and college...yet I'm still a conservative. Funny.

Funny, I went to private Catholic school and yet, I'm a liberal. Funny how your argument is completely retarded on multiple levels.

He didn't say he'd cut everybody's taxes. He was speaking to most of America.That's all you need to win an election..."most". Right?

For the other five percent, the discount tickets to life are over.Hahaha... I have no sympathy for the rich, but you realize that the top 5% already pay something like 80% of the income taxes collected in this country. I wouldn't call that a discount ticket for anyone other than those who are not paying as much.

Funny, I went to private Catholic school and yet, I'm a liberal. Funny how your argument is completely retarded on multiple levels.Better to say something retarded than to actually be retarded like you are.

The point was made that education leads to liberal views...implying that liberalism somehow means you're smarter. I have more education than the average American. I also make more money than the average American. How do you explain that?

Funny, I went to private Catholic school and yet, I'm a liberal. Funny how your argument is completely retarded on multiple levels.Then you were double indoctrinated. No wonder it stuck.

Halfwits tend to immerse themselves in fear and resentment, and are easier to persuade by means of shallow empty flattery.

These themes (1. fear of commies, terrorists, muslims, etc.; 2. resentment of "elitists," people who are "different"; and 3. flattery -- us Americans are unquely blessed, superior, virtuous, etc.) are the three pillars of Republican politics in America.

The irrational fear and resentment of rapture believers seems to have taken hold of some who would otherwise claim superiority.

And vice versa. Liberals educate themselves by seeking out information.

Guess that makes me a liberal. Where do I get my decoder ring?

That's all you need to win an election..."most". Right?Right! Thank Goodness for that 95% who'll see tax relief.Hahaha... I have no sympathy for the rich, but you realize that the top 5% already pay something like 80% of the income taxes collected in this country. I wouldn't call that a discount ticket for anyone other than those who are not paying as much.Those at the rarefied top have benefited the most from our economic and political systems and have the largest interest in supporting and maintaining them. That comes at a cost.

Then you were double indoctrinated. No wonder it stuck.

I was liberal before I was even aware of what it meant. There's no "indoctrination process" that makes people become liberal, you simpletons. Ascribing liberal ideology to the public school systems is one of the top 10 stupidest things I've ever heard from the right. Just how out of touch with reality can you guys get? Why do conservatives have such a hard time thinking that not everyone lives within a bubble of ignorance and fear like they do? Yes, it's true. There are people out there who are actually able to think for themselves and not let outdated, dysfunctional institutions do the thinking for them.

The irrational fear and resentment of rapture believers seems to have taken hold of some who would otherwise claim superiority.

Rapture believers such as the repugnant Tim LaHaye and John Hagee (to take two well-known examples) wield tremendous political power in the United States, and use that power to shape public policy toward irrational, self-destructive ends. Any rational person fears them for very sound reasons.

Rapture believers such as the repugnant Tim LaHaye and John Hagee (to take two well-known examples) wield tremendous political power in the United States, and use that power to shape public policy toward irrational, self-destructive ends. Any rational person fears them for very sound reasons.

No one with real authority listens to either of those guys. McCain certainly won't.

I was liberal before I was even aware of what it meant. There's no "indoctrination process" that makes people become liberal, you simpletons. Ascribing liberal ideology to the public school systems is one of the top 10 stupidest things I've ever heard from the right. Just how out of touch with reality can you guys get? Why do conservatives have such a hard time thinking that not everyone lives within a bubble of ignorance and fear like they do? Yes, it's true. There are people out there who are actually able to think for themselves and not let outdated, dysfunctional institutions do the thinking for them.Of course there are, but the majority may not be able to overcome the programming.

From the 1840s to the 1930s, public-school “progressive” activists like Horace Mann and John Dewey worked to create a public-school system like the one they admired in Prussia (Germany). Mann and Dewey considered public education a religion, with a holy mission to mold children and society. Simply teaching children to read, write, and do math was too commonplace a goal for them. Mann and Dewey wanted the schools to have total control over children’s lives. This meant removing parents’ influence over their children. Mann put it this way: “We who are engaged in the sacred cause of education are entitled to look upon all parents as having given hostages to our cause.”

Dewey had a socialist utopian vision for America and he wanted the common schools to achieve his vision. To create a government-dominated socialist America, public schools had to mold generations of children into the habit of obedience. In his “Pedagogic Creed” of 1897, Dewey wrote, “Every teacher should realize he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of the proper social order and the securing of the right social growth. . .”

By the early twentieth century, public schools had expanded their functions into areas undreamed of in the 1850s. Schools took on the role of social agencies, with nurses, social centers, playgrounds, school showers, kindergartens, and “Americanization” programs for immigrants. Public schools became a major agency for social control.

http://www.theabsurdreport.com/2006/public-school-indoctrination-camps-how-the-democrats-love-them/

No one with real authority listens to either of those guys. McCain certainly won't.

LOL, he only sought out Hagee's endorsement, and the other maniac end timer, Joe Lieberman, and let these nuts select his VP candidate for him!

LOL, he only sought out Hagee's endorsement, and the other maniac end timer, Joe Lieberman, and let these nuts select his VP candidate for him!

Man, you really have to get your people straight. Lieberman is not even a Christian, let alone a rapture believer. I can't take anything you say on this subject seriously if you're that ignorant on the subject. If you think a presidential candidate getting an endorsement from someone means anything more than he wants to pander to the group that person represents, then you need to take a hard look at who's endorsing Obama around the world, Muammar Gaddafi for one.

Put away the paint roller and look at some details for a change.

Man, you really have to get your people straight. Lieberman is not even a Christian, let alone a rapture believer. I can't take anything you say on this subject seriously if you're that ignorant on the subject.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/26/2786/

Do you ever do ANY research??


If you think a presidential candidate getting an endorsement from someone means anything more than he wants to pander to the group that person represents, then you need to take a hard look at who's endorsing Obama around the world, Muammar Gaddafi for one.

Isn't that the dude Condoleeza Rice just hung out with? Oh yea, he is the guy..


Put away the paint roller and look at some details for a change.

LOL, as if you've ever looked further than what is printed out on your talking points..:rolleyes:

"As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality."

--George Washington