Why have conservatives become so incredibly dumb?

[Pho King]

Why are you so afraid to answer the question, Pho King? NyQuil still kicking you in the head?

I did answer the question. The answer is that conservatives have not become so incredibly dumb. Your question presupposes agreement with you. So you will not believe your question has been answered unless it is by one whose ultimate goal is to feast on the cracker at the end of this stroke session. Its a pretty low level of discourse for one so convinced of his intellectual superiority as you. Indeed, it is exactly the kind of question one would expect form someone so convinced.

[Zordar]

You have given a false answer. Stop quivering and answer the question or begone.

[Freedom&Liberty]

LOL Zordar is funny.

[Pho King]

You have given a false answer. Stop quivering and answer the question or begone.

Ah.....I have found the One with the Answers.....

[Chachma v'Oz]

It is a point of view so self-aggrandizing that it is not worthy of consideration. The "if you don't agree with me its because you are stupid" type of validation. Very impressive.

Political Correctness is so '70s. (Were you even born yet?) I call them like I see them, and I see conservatives as hardwired wrong.

[BooRadley]

Ahhhh, more of the "when did you stop beating your wife" questions

Then you must have been asleep since 2003. The mass social movement that happened during the Bush years was extremely evident, and pretending it didn't happen may make you feel better, but it's not going to stop people from talking about it.

If you think the question is stupid, then why do you keep coming back to it?

[Pho King]

Political Correctness is so '70s. (Were you even born yet?) I call them like I see them, and I see conservatives as hardwired wrong.

Im not suggesting you don't actually believe your conclusions, just that the "if you dont agree with me theres something wrong with you" type of conclusions require very little effort to reach.

[Pho King]

Then you must have been asleep since 2003. The mass social movement that happened during the Bush years was extremely evident, and pretending it didn't happen may make you feel better, but it's not going to stop people from talking about it.

If you think the question is stupid, then why do you keep coming back to it?

Its not that it is a stupid question, its a question that demands agreement. As for the mass social movement you describe, I have neither confirmed nor denied a belief that it happened. What I am denying is the rather simplitic conclusion you and others have jumped to. But it is a conclusion that makes YOU feel better, so enjoy your awesomeness.

[Dinar Agapova]

Conservatives are what made our nation great

[Chachma v'Oz]

Yes, my conclusions took a long time, but ultimately little effort, to reach. The deterioration Boo speaks to happened before my eyes, as well.

In the '60s the radicals highjacked the Democratic Party. It eventually recovered, after we gave up on "saving" Southeast Asia from the Red Menace. In the '90s right wing radicals highjacked the GOP and are still firmly in charge. What moderates remain there are too timid to confront them. The rest of us former Republicans were left stranded in the middle ground and refused to be dragged out into far right field by the wackos and the ever expanding Democratic Party welcomed us into its fold. It does indeed have a big umbrella.

I fear that unless the moderates retake the GOP from its fringe extremists, it will cease to be a voice in American politics. The only function it serves anyone now is growing interest in a Liberal Movement to balance it. That, of course, leaves the Democrats running the show for the foreseeable future.

[Šñøü†ê®]

This "moderate" terminology disgusts me. If it is snowing out, I want heavy snow, not moderate, wimpy snow. Same thing with public servants. I don't want a public servant who moderately protects my liberties, I want an extremist believer in freedom and liberty!

[Pho King]

Yes, my conclusions took a long time, but ultimately little effort, to reach. The deterioration Boo speaks to happened before my eyes, as well.

In the '60s the radicals highjacked the Democratic Party. It eventually recovered, after we gave up on "saving" Southeast Asia from the Red Menace. In the '90s right wing radicals highjacked the GOP and are still firmly in charge. What moderates remain there are too timid to confront them. The rest of us former Republicans were left stranded in the middle ground and refused to be dragged out into far right field by the wackos and the ever expanding Democratic Party welcomed us into its fold. It does indeed have a big umbrella.

I fear that unless the moderates retake the GOP from its fringe extremists, it will cease to be a voice in American politics. The only function it serves anyone now is growing interest in a Liberal Movement to balance it. That, of course, leaves the Democrats running the show for the foreseeable future.

Funny, many of us see the same problem with the dems- they are owned by extremists. And of course, you have not been referring to the Republican party, but to Conservatives- the retards with poorly formed brains you so bemoan.

I too call it like I see it. The easiest way to discount beliefs that conflict with your own is to merely label the holder of such beliefs as stupid. That you came to this conclusion easily, but over many years, undercuts your imagined superiority.

[BooRadley]

Its not that it is a stupid question, its a question that demands agreement. As for the mass social movement you describe, I have neither confirmed nor denied a belief that it happened. What I am denying is the rather simplitic conclusion you and others have jumped to. But it is a conclusion that makes YOU feel better, so enjoy your awesomeness.

First of all, you did acknowledge that you're aware of the phenomena that we're talking about, so you can skip that. Second of all, you've littered this place up with your own posts about what "the progs" think/say/do/etc., so step down off that horse, Hoss. Third, I saw something. Others saw the same thing. We're discussing that thing. If you didn't see it, you're free to argue that it didn't happen (you already said you know it did, but you've been pretty dishonest so far, so you might as well).

I don't demand agreement with my suggestion as to the cause of the event. I say it was not organic, that it was a purposeful assault on reality by party leaderhip. You're welcome to argue that it was caused by something else. Or, if you want, you can even argue that it never happened. You're doing none of the above, though, you're only arguing that you dislike the question. In fact, you're not even arguing it, you're just repeating it over and over again.

I think the pattern is something like:
1. Make post about how silly "the progs" are.
2. Come here, make post about how bad it is to make posts about a political group as a whole, and demand that it's beneath you.
3. GOTO 1

We assert: The Republicans, as a whole, went batshit crazy a few years ago.
You counter: whaaaa i dont like your assertion but i wont argue it im just here to be a partisan bomb thrower because im better than you!!!!!!!!!
We reply: Then fuck off. Go talk about "the progs" somewhere.

[kellyb]

Funny, many of us see the same problem with the dems- they are owned by extremists.

I'd love to see the argument that the dems are owned by "extremists" (unless you mean warmongeting extremism, and Wall Street serving extremism, etc.)

[Pho King]

First of all, you did acknowledge that you're aware of the phenomena that we're talking about, so you can skip that. Second of all, you've littered this place up with your own posts about what "the progs" think/say/do/etc., so step down off that horse, Hoss. Third, I saw something. Others saw the same thing. We're discussing that thing. If you didn't see it, you're free to argue that it didn't happen (you already said you know it did, but you've been pretty dishonest so far, so you might as well).

I don't demand agreement with my suggestion as to the cause of the event. I say it was not organic, that it was a purposeful assault on reality by party leaderhip. You're welcome to argue that it was caused by something else. Or, if you want, you can even argue that it never happened. You're doing none of the above, though, you're only arguing that you dislike the question. In fact, you're not even arguing it, you're just repeating it over and over again.

I think the pattern is something like:
1. Make post about how silly "the progs" are.
2. Come here, make post about how bad it is to make posts about a political group as a whole, and demand that it's beneath you.
3. GOTO 1

We assert: The Republicans, as a whole, went batshit crazy a few years ago.
You counter: whaaaa i dont like your assertion but i wont argue it im just here to be a partisan bomb thrower because im better than you!!!!!!!!!
We reply: Then fuck off. Go talk about "the progs" somewhere.

What a cute response. The fact remains though, that in asking the question "why have conservatives become so incredibly dumb" you reveal much more about your self than any of your answers could provide about conservatives. i don't mind the question. But it is a question that cannot be asked unless one agrees that indeed, conservatives have become so incredibly dumb. The question demands agreement as to the premise. And in that regard- it is in no way an honest attempt to understand why conservatives are not progs. Its amazing that you accuse me of being a flame-thrower. I am merely shining a light on those with such a motivation.

[Zordar]

I'd love to see the argument that the dems are owned by "extremists"

I would too. Even here on the left coast, this hasn't been true since 2006.

I swore I'd never vote for a Democrat again ten years ago. Never, never, never. But as much as I love to hate those pansies, I have to give them credit for making me eat my own words. Barring the emergence of a few pointy-headed commies in 2010 when Obama and the Democrats were still believing their own hype, the Dems have done an absolutely fantabulous job at marginalizing their extremists these last few election cycles. Somehow, they have managed to become less bad than the Republicans in less than a decade. That's huge. Good job, pussies!

[BooRadley]

What a cute response.

Glad to help cheer up your day.

[Pho King]

I would too. Even here on the left coast, this hasn't been true since 2006.

I swore I'd never vote for a Democrat again ten years ago. Never, never, never. But as much as I love to hate those pansies, I have to give them credit for making me eat my own words. Barring the emergence of a few pointy-headed commies in 2010 when Obama and the Democrats were still believing their own hype, the Dems have done an absolutely fantabulous job at marginalizing their extremists these last few election cycles. Somehow, they have managed to become less bad than the Republicans in less than a decade. That's huge. Good job, pussies!

That is a remarkable thing to say. It seems to me as though the dems have simply mainstreamed their extremists. Consider the individula mandate under the ACA. A massive expansion of government power, with unlimited attendant restrictions on freedom. Embraced by the dems.

[Pho King]

Glad to help cheer up your day.

Actually, I am a bit old to be partial to displays of juvenile cutesy. But your optimism is refreshing.

[BooRadley]

Actually, I am a bit old to be partial to displays of juvenile cutesy. But your optimism is refreshing.

Actually, you're a pretentious, condescending ass and a self-righteous partisan bombthrower who's only fooling himself. But your self-deception is amusing.