ImLogicallyRight

As usual, you are so totally wrong. What we believe in is not written in stone but a general confirmation of righteous thinking people that generally adhere to those proncipals as written above.

There is no irony as you declare. The e******n was/is a massive fraud on all Americans. Not all Democrats and anti Trump v**ers. We believe that they are entitled to their v**es just as we are, one legal v**e, per registered v**er, who chooses to v**e. That didn't happen and to what extent across America may never be known, but certainly in massive numbers in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona. It was a deliberate, coordinated attack on our country by treasonous elements, that were carried out by some of the low level workers in the actual manipulating of the v**es, on up to possibly stretching to a former President. The fact that you don't believe in this fraud just gives testimony to your being a biased hack. I personally believe, as I have a right to do, that you would have possibly assisted this fraud if given the chance and you and others like you show that nature in you on a daily basis. But, that is just my belief. I would hope it isn't so.

Actually, it is the Conservative belief system that is built on t***h and the Liberal belief system that is based on lies like the e******n was the safest and most open e******n in our history. What a joke.

Logically Right.

ImLogicallyRight

He'll never answer. No guts.

ImLogicallyRight

***Because of that, we lack the demagogues to spread the propaganda that conservatives have. Less propaganda allows us to think more for ourselves. That's all it is. You conservatives look for demagogues to tell you what to think. We liberals don't. End of story...
>>>Total Bull s**tte. As usual and all backwards. You Liberals are few massive lies by MSM, and blocking of news even by Social Media so you can't learn the t***h. And you liberals are also fed crap by your elected leaders that defys reality and common sense. You are really pathetic.

LR

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

Garbage in, garbage out.

manning5 Loc: Richmond, VA

I thank Blade, Seth, BigMike and LR in particular for their very positive comments on my post!

When I bare my political ideas in this forum, it is very gratifying to find substantial agreement with the positions I've taken.

PeterS

Gosh Blade, first, at least I've taken a couple of courses in political science--one that did a pretty in-depth study of ideologies so I have more than the self-taught approach that you use. Second, you didn't even know that Conservatism was an ideology (this is the problem with teaching yourself) when we started so don't lecture me on what I know and don't know. You know less than nothing and you lecture freely on how evil Liberalism is as well as those who make up the ideology.

The failure of your ideology is that it adheres to Affirmation vs Confirmation. You use your peer's and demagogues parading as News sources to affirm what you believe. If it doesn't do that you label it "f**e news" and you dismiss it without any type of consideration. Of course, the danger in this is that you may be dismissing the t***h while accepting a fallacy in its place. I commend Manning because at least he is willing to do a little self-examination. That's something I don't think you have the ability to do because you will only accept that which affirms what you already believe and you will reject anything new.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

I'm not set in my beliefs. Not as you define them.

PeterS

I hadn't seen your post when I wrote this:

Snip>>>The failure of your ideology is that it adheres to Affirmation vs Confirmation. You use your peers and demagogues parading as News sources to affirm what you believe. If it doesn't do that you label it "f**e news" and you dismiss it without any type of consideration. Of course, the danger in this is that you may be dismissing the t***h while accepting a fallacy in its place.

We all appreciate agreement with our belief system but that doesn't tell us if our belief system is true. If it's t***h that you seek don't look to those who always agree with you...

PeterS

Not as I define them? But you are set in your beliefs, just not as I define them??? Explain...

PeterS

I didn't say your beliefs were written in stone. I said that you look for information that affirms what you believe. An affirmation allows us the wiggle room to fit it in our wheelhouse of beliefs.

Heres an example. Conservatives have long thought that Liberals used dead people, i*****l a***ns, etc for illegal v**es to c***t at e******ns. So when Trump added mail fraud and v**e switching software you conservatives believed it without giving it a second thought. So even though Chris Krebs (a Trump hiree) confirmed that this couldn't have happened and that this was the most secure e******n ever you didn't believe that for a second.

Am I right? If so, that's called affirmation vs confirmation. You accepted without question that which affirmed what you already believed (Liberals c***t) and reject confirmation (liberals didn't c***t) because it challenged what you already affirmed.

So your belief system did change--you added liberals c***t through the mail and by flipping the v**es--all while your central belief system (liberals are c***ters) remained the same.

And I am not wrong. You only seek affirmation but never a confirmation of what you believe. If something generally fits your belief system you accept it. But if it doesn't fit your belief system, even though it's been confirmed, you will reject it without giving it a second thought.

This is the central flaw in conservatism because you will reject the t***h--even though it's been confirmed--and accept a lie even though all you have is the affirmation of your peers.!

American Vet

[quote=PeterS]I didn't say your beliefs were written in stone. I said that you look for information that affirms what you believe. An affirmation allows us the wiggle room to fit it in our wheelhouse of beliefs.

Heres an example. Conservatives have long thought that Liberals used dead people, /quote]

Chicago - a Democrat stronghold

CHICAGO - (CBS) — Susie Sallee was buried in 1998. Yet records show she v**ed in Chicago 12 years later.

Victor Crosswell died in 1994, but records show he’s v**ed six times since then.

And then there’s Floyd Stevens. Records show he’s v**ed 11 times since his death in 1993.


“It’s crazy,” Sharon Stevens Anderson, Stevens’ daughter, tells CBS 2’s Pam Zekman. “I don’t see how people can be able to do something like that and get away with it.”

Those are just a few of the cases CBS 2 Investigators found by merging Chicago Board of E******n v**er histories with the death master file from the Social Security Administration.

In all, the analysis showed 119 dead people have v**ed a total of 229 times in Chicago in the last decade.


https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/10/27/2-investigators-chicago-v**ers-cast-b****ts-from-beyond-the-grave/

PeterS

[quote=American Vet]
So were these dead people or were they the spouses of dead people who use their dead husband's name to v**e? I ask because this just happened where the president accused a woman of v****g as her husband when all she did was use the (Mrs.) in front of her husband's name...prompting the president to accuse her of v****g for her husband.

Snip>>Agnes Blalock, 94, confirmed she always v**ed as Mrs James Blalock
Her husband died in 2006, aged 81, and the Trump campaign claimed he v**ed
Tucker Carlson seized on the Trump campaign's accusation on Wednesday
On Friday night Carlson was forced to apologize and admit he got it wrong
The widow told 11 Alive: 'He's not v****g. He didn't v**e. It was me.'
The president is trying everything possible to overturn the results of the e******n

Now it's possible someone can v**e for a dead person--they can steal their v***r r**********n and their v**er ID--but you have to know someone died and you have to access their registration and ID. A spouse might do that--not likely to happen-- or as in this case, the spouse might just be using her married name to v**e.

In either case, you just cited 10 instances a year and not exactly what I would call massive v***r f***d!

American Vet

That's called a 'goal post move'. I pointed out there certainly appears to be v**ed fraud in Chicago with some dead people v****g - now you want to claim "massive" v**ed fraud.

FallenOak Loc: St George Utah

Name a l*****t that has said to his Conservative Parents, "Your money was earned on the backs of the poor and so I reject it."

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Gosh, Pete, you took a couple courses in PolySci and you learned what?

That,
Conservatism is a failed "ideology"?
Conservatives "use" news sources to affirm their beliefs?
Conservatives dismiss the t***h in favor of fallacies?
Conservatives are not capable of confirmation?
Conservatives accept that which affirms what they already believe?
Conservatives are "self-taught"?
Conservatives are incapable of self-examination? Except in rare instances, of course.

OK, so what was the political philosophy of your PolySci prof? What was the ideology of the authors of your text book? Did your PolySci courses attempt to answer the ageless philosophical questions of Origin, Meaning, Morality, and Destiny?

The five fields of knowledge necessary in answering those questions, in seeking the t***h about human existence are Metaphysics, Ethics, Anthropology, Epistemology, and Theology. (Political science is not among them). These disciplines must be applied equally, omit or ignore any one of them and your search will fail.

The statement that science is the only way to t***h contradicts itself because that statement has no basis in science.

Conservatism is a philosophy, not an ideology. It is based on freedom, individuality, a sense of community, the sanctity of the family, the supremacy of the conscience, and the spiritual view of life.

Conservatism looks upon politics as the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. The conservative is the first to understand that “the practice of freedom requires the establishment of order.” It is impossible for one man to be free if another is able to deny him the exercise of his freedom.

But the conservative also recognizes that the political power on which order is based is a self-aggrandizing force; that its appetite grows with each feeding. The conservative knows that the utmost vigilance and care are required to keep political power within its proper bounds.

If you ever do an honest self-examination and commit to seeking answers to those enduring questions, let us know.