The Ultra Conservative Mind
Mar 3, 2013 17:19:58 #
Of late I have taken up the challenge of engaging the extremist element of the conservative camp in cyber conversation, in the hope of coming to better understand how they think, and see the world. Let me start by saying, that while my views are light years removed from those of the conservatives, I realize that they believe in what they say as fervently as I do. And, like conservatives, I see the world through the prism of my own values. I know that we on the left are not perfect, and right all of the time, and I accept that. However, when I make a point or take a position I make every effort to back it up with objectively researched documentation. I honestly cannot say the same for many on the right who I encounter. In fact, in the course of these interactions, I've become fascinated by the amount of drivel that is put out on the internet by Obama phoebes and small government zealots. While I seek to engage in meaningful discourse on the facts, I am most often met with vitriol, ideological and religious claptrap devoid of substance, conspiracy theories, and a pathological denial of reality. Rarely does anyone respond directly to points that I try to make. Having said this, allow me to share my observations.
First let me say, that I see a good deal of rigidity among conservatives. They are unable to see any nuances of difference in discussing certain topics such as Socialism. One is either a Socialist or they are not and if they are, they are always bad. They refuse to acknowledge that Soviet Socialism, and Hitlers purported and perverted state socialism were vastly different from each other, as well as from the social democratic policies and programs that have been in effect in this country since, at least Teddy Roosevelt. They then promote the notion, that because Obama may have what some might consider socialistic views, (as did many presidents before him) he is automatically Hitler, or Stalin. There is also a demonstrable anti intellectualism at play here. If they reference history at all, its a revisionist history, using cherry picked facts. As an example, they like to point out that Hitler did in fact claim to be a socialist, and early on claimed to have drawn inspiration from Marx, but ignore the evidence that he eventually purged the party of Marxists and was no friend of labor unions. And recently, a number of conservative publications have published articles about Obamas nomination of Esther Duflo as a top economic advisor with headlines stating ,matter-of-factly, that she is a socialist without actually explaining that further. I have been unable to find any documentation that she describes herself as a socialist, or that anyone else has either. She has ,however dev**ed a large part of her career to investigating the causes and remedies of poverty. And, she is French. In addition, they scream that he has foreigners running the country while being blissfully ignorant of the fact that she is a US citizen.
This rigidity and aversion to intellectual inquiry is also apparent when discussing dependency; welfare and other social programs. To the conservative mind, youre either making it on your own, or youre a slug, a leach, lazy and unmotivated. They are totally unforgiving when it comes to people who may need government assistance. They are so fearful of anything that smacks of welfare that they ignore the reality of the cruelty of a free market economy (and yes it is still largely free) which, ironically, they adamantly support. Far be it from me to seek to impugn any ones intelligence, but that sort of rigidity is often associated a less than Mensa grade I.Q. Just saying.
Apart from intelligence, there is the low information and misinformation factor, which results in part from the anti intellectual element, but which is also driven by the fear of learning something that is in-congruent with their beliefs. Returning to the subject of dependency, they will cite anecdotal evidence of welfare abuse; recipients driving SUVs, crack heads on food stamps and decide that all people on assistance are the same, while ignoring the statistics that demonstrate the reality of poverty and that most are not on drugs or collecting fraudulently. They blame Obama for joblessness, while simultaneously clinging to the belief that anyone can find a job if they would just get up off their duff and look for work-in effect denying that there is a shortage of jobs-that they blame Obama for. They repeatedly decry the Obama Economy but seem to be ignorant of the destruction left by Bush 43, or of Republican obstruction of the Presidents initiatives to fix the mess.
These same people will complain about paying too much in taxes and are seemingly unaware that taxes are historically low. They continue to whine about the 47% who pay no federal income tax but are ignorant, or pretend to be ignorant of the fact that those people pay other federal, state and local taxes, and that many work but are still struggling. Likewise, they ignore the fact that the disabled, the retired, and veterans are included in those ranks, and many of them are republicans from red states which harbor higher percentages of these 47 percenters. They continue to make the deficit a major issue and make statement like Obama has added more to the deficit than all other presidents combined, which is blatantly and demonstrably false.
I also find that they are very angry people. Now, I understand that its natural to be angry when things are not great, and for too many people life is hard, while it appears that others are getting over. Its also a fact of political life that the incumbent is the convenient target of rage. However, while there is plenty of blame to go around, Obama is the target almost exclusively. They lash out at him in what seems to be a blind and irrational rage, sparked by the most mundane bits of information. An article appeared recently on the extremist Reagan Coaltion.com blog entitled Obamas $100K G****l W*****g Propaganda Game. Apparently, the National Endowment for the Arts, an independent federal agency for which the president appoints a chairperson, but has no control over, is funding a video game which focuses on a young black female superhero sent to earth to save her own planet from c*****e c****e caused by social issues impacting women. While this presents an opportunity for a rational discussion of the best use of NEA funds, that moment was lost to anger and rage. One choice response: Thay have all become T*****Rs and converted to Islam> there goal is world domination so is the NWO.(New World Order) BANKRUPT AMERICA DECLAIR MARSHALL LAW AND THROW 90% OF THE AMERICANS INTO FEMA CAMPS and KEEP THE OTHER 10% of WOMAN FOR HIS S***ES. Brilliant! I see some paranoia in there someplace too. I will add that grants are awarded by the NEA board. And, the Obama administration cut funding to NEA by 12% IN 2012. It is hardly Obama propaganda.
Another article in the same right wing rag screams. Obama Commits Treason Its not quite clear how he may have done so, but it appears to have something to do with his encouraging talks between the Taliban and the government in Kabul. Again an opportunity to engage in meaningful debate is lost to hyperbole. Rather than discuss the merits of negotiation with terrorists, the rights response is to call for impeachment.
There is also a basic underlying selfishness. It manifests itself in the philosophy that altruism fosters dependency and therefore is evil, but its really just a rationalization for not giving up even a few crumbs of the pie. Most people outgrow Ayn Rand by the time they are adults these guys dont. (By the way, its always fun to remind Republicans and Libertarians that Ayn Rand was a pro choice atheist)
There is also an element of paranoia. Theyre coming for my guns; Hes going to impose martial law, or sharia law. Theyre taking away our freedom but cant say what those freedoms are. Hes going to hand over sovereignty to the UN, to Canada, to Mexico. He h**es America and wants to destroy her. And they hear things that are not said, voices in their heads. Its been said that I want to destroy capitalism by supporting social programs and the regulation of business. I never said that Capitalism is, in itself a bad thing, and Im not a Marxist. Someone else accused me of wanting to destroy Christianity because I advocated for separation of church and state.
Religious and racial bigotry plays no small part. While there is usually a certain subtlety to the r****m, there are no holds barred when it comes to religion. While speaking candidly, like a real person, on a talk show, Michele Obama revealed that she and her husband did not exchange Christmas gifts. This became more proof that they are Muslims. However, it was not long before, that they expressed outrage that the White House was adorned by some 54 Christmas trees. But this was not taken as proof of their Christianity; rather it was decried as More out of control spending! (Perhaps they should have held the line at 49 trees like G.W. Bush. No one complained then) If the Obama detractors were a little more astute, they would know that the trees are actually proof that the Obamas are Pagans who dance naked under the moon in the Rose Garden on the Solstice, after which they sacrifice a litter of kittens.
There is no denying that huge numbers of people, particularly conservatives think that Obama is Muslim, and always as a pejorative. A Pew survey recently found that 17 % of registered v**ers think that he is a Muslim and when looking just at conservative Republicans, it rose to 34%. What is not clear is the extent to which they actually believe it or just use it so say Hes not like us, he different, hes foreign and as a substitute for more incendiary racial epithets. In any case, its interesting to note that regardless of the subject at hand, no matter what crime hes being accused of at any given time, one, and usually several people will have to throw in Muslim as a means of further maligning him and proving that he h**es America. Moreover, what is not said is telling as well. Few others ever speak out about the slurs, indicating a tacit agreement.
The evidence of bigotry is overwhelming. Colin Powel, a Republican supporter of Obama (and yes I know hes black) put it succinctly: Theres also a dark a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party. What do I mean by that? I mean by that that they still sort of look down on minorities. How can I evidence that?.. When I see a former governor say that the President is shuckin and jivin, thats racial era s***e term. The birther, the whole birther movement. Why do senior Republican leaders tolerate this kind of discussion within the party? A recent study by a Harvard Doctoral student analyzed Google searches and charted how frequently racial epithets like n****r were used in various regions. He concluded that race may have cost Obama 3 to 5% of the popular v**e in 2008. Similarly, A study of h**e speech on Twitter in the week surrounding President Barack Obamas ree******n this week concluded that most of the r****t rhetoric against Obama emanated from southern states.
There are numerous other instances where things have been said and done that exemplify antipathy towards the President, that is exacerbated by this rigidity, paranoia, anger, r****m, and lack of information. A story surfaced about a discussion that took place in 2009, at Treasury, about giving investors an opportunity to convert their IRA and 401Ks to Treasury Annuities to guarantee lifetime benefits since so many had lost so much in the Bush inspired crash of 2008. The conservatives take on it Obama seeks to nationalize retirement benefits-mandatory takeover of accounts. I might add that this inflammatory story was run in late 2012, when there had been no mention of it for 4 or 5 years prior, and there was no indication that Obama was even involved in those discussions, leave alone supported the idea.
Also, here was a recent news article about a New York member of the House of Representatives introduced a bill to repeal the 22nd amendment, which would lift the two term limit on the presidency. The conservative hype was: Obama takes steps to secure a third and fourth term, become president for life. However there are a few problems with this. 1) This same bill has been introduced every couple of years for decades regardless of which party was in power, and has never come up for a v**e. 2) Obama had nothing to do with the bill. 3) it would never get through congress. 3) It would require ratification of 2/3 of the states- a detail not mentioned amidst the hysteria. 4) Even if passed, Obama would still have to be reelected-unless ..OMG!
And, a recent headline accurately stated that Obama will seek to reinstate assault the weapon ban. Conservatives immediately started to scream that he is a liar because he had previously stated that he will not seek to take away their guns. True, he did make that statement. However, he also stated, during his campaign for his first term that he would in fact seek to ban assault weapons-a fact that was conveniently omitted now. They deliberately muddled the distinction between assault weapons and all guns to malign the president. Of course, with all of these examples , its possible that the writers know full well what they are doing when posting lies and distortions . Rather than out of ignorance, the motive may be hatred and anger, and the desire to spread fear, knowing that there are many who will eagerly believe them and not bother to check the facts. Either way, its despicable.
Fear mongering is very much a staple of the cyber marauders. Perhaps the best example of this is the long circulating story that a 3.9% surcharge will be levied on anyone who sells a home, to help pay for Obamacare. Like so many other falsehoods that are spread, there is a small grain of t***h upon which the grand lie is built. The law does in fact mention a 3.9% tax. However, it applies only to excess capital gains on investment property sold by the wealthiest people. The people perpetrating this insanity will doubtlessly call themselves patriots while disseminating lies that can only harm a fragile economy. This is just more proof that they h**e Obama more than they love America.
I could cover other issues the those on the right distort and lie about; The war on reproductive rights as being really waged by liberals, The immigrants who come to America to get on welfare, The liberal quest to force educators to teach the homosexual agenda in schools, but I think that Ive made my point. The dynamics and motives are always the same; to smear Obama and everything progressive any way they can, regardless of the harm that it may do to the country that they purportedly love. In closing, let me say that this is my call to engage in fact based responsible dialog aimed at finding solutions that work rather than continuing to tear the country apart. Perhaps you may even teach me something
As always , I welcome comments, rebuttals and death threats. Thank you for being offended.
First let me say, that I see a good deal of rigidity among conservatives. They are unable to see any nuances of difference in discussing certain topics such as Socialism. One is either a Socialist or they are not and if they are, they are always bad. They refuse to acknowledge that Soviet Socialism, and Hitlers purported and perverted state socialism were vastly different from each other, as well as from the social democratic policies and programs that have been in effect in this country since, at least Teddy Roosevelt. They then promote the notion, that because Obama may have what some might consider socialistic views, (as did many presidents before him) he is automatically Hitler, or Stalin. There is also a demonstrable anti intellectualism at play here. If they reference history at all, its a revisionist history, using cherry picked facts. As an example, they like to point out that Hitler did in fact claim to be a socialist, and early on claimed to have drawn inspiration from Marx, but ignore the evidence that he eventually purged the party of Marxists and was no friend of labor unions. And recently, a number of conservative publications have published articles about Obamas nomination of Esther Duflo as a top economic advisor with headlines stating ,matter-of-factly, that she is a socialist without actually explaining that further. I have been unable to find any documentation that she describes herself as a socialist, or that anyone else has either. She has ,however dev**ed a large part of her career to investigating the causes and remedies of poverty. And, she is French. In addition, they scream that he has foreigners running the country while being blissfully ignorant of the fact that she is a US citizen.
This rigidity and aversion to intellectual inquiry is also apparent when discussing dependency; welfare and other social programs. To the conservative mind, youre either making it on your own, or youre a slug, a leach, lazy and unmotivated. They are totally unforgiving when it comes to people who may need government assistance. They are so fearful of anything that smacks of welfare that they ignore the reality of the cruelty of a free market economy (and yes it is still largely free) which, ironically, they adamantly support. Far be it from me to seek to impugn any ones intelligence, but that sort of rigidity is often associated a less than Mensa grade I.Q. Just saying.
Apart from intelligence, there is the low information and misinformation factor, which results in part from the anti intellectual element, but which is also driven by the fear of learning something that is in-congruent with their beliefs. Returning to the subject of dependency, they will cite anecdotal evidence of welfare abuse; recipients driving SUVs, crack heads on food stamps and decide that all people on assistance are the same, while ignoring the statistics that demonstrate the reality of poverty and that most are not on drugs or collecting fraudulently. They blame Obama for joblessness, while simultaneously clinging to the belief that anyone can find a job if they would just get up off their duff and look for work-in effect denying that there is a shortage of jobs-that they blame Obama for. They repeatedly decry the Obama Economy but seem to be ignorant of the destruction left by Bush 43, or of Republican obstruction of the Presidents initiatives to fix the mess.
These same people will complain about paying too much in taxes and are seemingly unaware that taxes are historically low. They continue to whine about the 47% who pay no federal income tax but are ignorant, or pretend to be ignorant of the fact that those people pay other federal, state and local taxes, and that many work but are still struggling. Likewise, they ignore the fact that the disabled, the retired, and veterans are included in those ranks, and many of them are republicans from red states which harbor higher percentages of these 47 percenters. They continue to make the deficit a major issue and make statement like Obama has added more to the deficit than all other presidents combined, which is blatantly and demonstrably false.
I also find that they are very angry people. Now, I understand that its natural to be angry when things are not great, and for too many people life is hard, while it appears that others are getting over. Its also a fact of political life that the incumbent is the convenient target of rage. However, while there is plenty of blame to go around, Obama is the target almost exclusively. They lash out at him in what seems to be a blind and irrational rage, sparked by the most mundane bits of information. An article appeared recently on the extremist Reagan Coaltion.com blog entitled Obamas $100K G****l W*****g Propaganda Game. Apparently, the National Endowment for the Arts, an independent federal agency for which the president appoints a chairperson, but has no control over, is funding a video game which focuses on a young black female superhero sent to earth to save her own planet from c*****e c****e caused by social issues impacting women. While this presents an opportunity for a rational discussion of the best use of NEA funds, that moment was lost to anger and rage. One choice response: Thay have all become T*****Rs and converted to Islam> there goal is world domination so is the NWO.(New World Order) BANKRUPT AMERICA DECLAIR MARSHALL LAW AND THROW 90% OF THE AMERICANS INTO FEMA CAMPS and KEEP THE OTHER 10% of WOMAN FOR HIS S***ES. Brilliant! I see some paranoia in there someplace too. I will add that grants are awarded by the NEA board. And, the Obama administration cut funding to NEA by 12% IN 2012. It is hardly Obama propaganda.
Another article in the same right wing rag screams. Obama Commits Treason Its not quite clear how he may have done so, but it appears to have something to do with his encouraging talks between the Taliban and the government in Kabul. Again an opportunity to engage in meaningful debate is lost to hyperbole. Rather than discuss the merits of negotiation with terrorists, the rights response is to call for impeachment.
There is also a basic underlying selfishness. It manifests itself in the philosophy that altruism fosters dependency and therefore is evil, but its really just a rationalization for not giving up even a few crumbs of the pie. Most people outgrow Ayn Rand by the time they are adults these guys dont. (By the way, its always fun to remind Republicans and Libertarians that Ayn Rand was a pro choice atheist)
There is also an element of paranoia. Theyre coming for my guns; Hes going to impose martial law, or sharia law. Theyre taking away our freedom but cant say what those freedoms are. Hes going to hand over sovereignty to the UN, to Canada, to Mexico. He h**es America and wants to destroy her. And they hear things that are not said, voices in their heads. Its been said that I want to destroy capitalism by supporting social programs and the regulation of business. I never said that Capitalism is, in itself a bad thing, and Im not a Marxist. Someone else accused me of wanting to destroy Christianity because I advocated for separation of church and state.
Religious and racial bigotry plays no small part. While there is usually a certain subtlety to the r****m, there are no holds barred when it comes to religion. While speaking candidly, like a real person, on a talk show, Michele Obama revealed that she and her husband did not exchange Christmas gifts. This became more proof that they are Muslims. However, it was not long before, that they expressed outrage that the White House was adorned by some 54 Christmas trees. But this was not taken as proof of their Christianity; rather it was decried as More out of control spending! (Perhaps they should have held the line at 49 trees like G.W. Bush. No one complained then) If the Obama detractors were a little more astute, they would know that the trees are actually proof that the Obamas are Pagans who dance naked under the moon in the Rose Garden on the Solstice, after which they sacrifice a litter of kittens.
There is no denying that huge numbers of people, particularly conservatives think that Obama is Muslim, and always as a pejorative. A Pew survey recently found that 17 % of registered v**ers think that he is a Muslim and when looking just at conservative Republicans, it rose to 34%. What is not clear is the extent to which they actually believe it or just use it so say Hes not like us, he different, hes foreign and as a substitute for more incendiary racial epithets. In any case, its interesting to note that regardless of the subject at hand, no matter what crime hes being accused of at any given time, one, and usually several people will have to throw in Muslim as a means of further maligning him and proving that he h**es America. Moreover, what is not said is telling as well. Few others ever speak out about the slurs, indicating a tacit agreement.
The evidence of bigotry is overwhelming. Colin Powel, a Republican supporter of Obama (and yes I know hes black) put it succinctly: Theres also a dark a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party. What do I mean by that? I mean by that that they still sort of look down on minorities. How can I evidence that?.. When I see a former governor say that the President is shuckin and jivin, thats racial era s***e term. The birther, the whole birther movement. Why do senior Republican leaders tolerate this kind of discussion within the party? A recent study by a Harvard Doctoral student analyzed Google searches and charted how frequently racial epithets like n****r were used in various regions. He concluded that race may have cost Obama 3 to 5% of the popular v**e in 2008. Similarly, A study of h**e speech on Twitter in the week surrounding President Barack Obamas ree******n this week concluded that most of the r****t rhetoric against Obama emanated from southern states.
There are numerous other instances where things have been said and done that exemplify antipathy towards the President, that is exacerbated by this rigidity, paranoia, anger, r****m, and lack of information. A story surfaced about a discussion that took place in 2009, at Treasury, about giving investors an opportunity to convert their IRA and 401Ks to Treasury Annuities to guarantee lifetime benefits since so many had lost so much in the Bush inspired crash of 2008. The conservatives take on it Obama seeks to nationalize retirement benefits-mandatory takeover of accounts. I might add that this inflammatory story was run in late 2012, when there had been no mention of it for 4 or 5 years prior, and there was no indication that Obama was even involved in those discussions, leave alone supported the idea.
Also, here was a recent news article about a New York member of the House of Representatives introduced a bill to repeal the 22nd amendment, which would lift the two term limit on the presidency. The conservative hype was: Obama takes steps to secure a third and fourth term, become president for life. However there are a few problems with this. 1) This same bill has been introduced every couple of years for decades regardless of which party was in power, and has never come up for a v**e. 2) Obama had nothing to do with the bill. 3) it would never get through congress. 3) It would require ratification of 2/3 of the states- a detail not mentioned amidst the hysteria. 4) Even if passed, Obama would still have to be reelected-unless ..OMG!
And, a recent headline accurately stated that Obama will seek to reinstate assault the weapon ban. Conservatives immediately started to scream that he is a liar because he had previously stated that he will not seek to take away their guns. True, he did make that statement. However, he also stated, during his campaign for his first term that he would in fact seek to ban assault weapons-a fact that was conveniently omitted now. They deliberately muddled the distinction between assault weapons and all guns to malign the president. Of course, with all of these examples , its possible that the writers know full well what they are doing when posting lies and distortions . Rather than out of ignorance, the motive may be hatred and anger, and the desire to spread fear, knowing that there are many who will eagerly believe them and not bother to check the facts. Either way, its despicable.
Fear mongering is very much a staple of the cyber marauders. Perhaps the best example of this is the long circulating story that a 3.9% surcharge will be levied on anyone who sells a home, to help pay for Obamacare. Like so many other falsehoods that are spread, there is a small grain of t***h upon which the grand lie is built. The law does in fact mention a 3.9% tax. However, it applies only to excess capital gains on investment property sold by the wealthiest people. The people perpetrating this insanity will doubtlessly call themselves patriots while disseminating lies that can only harm a fragile economy. This is just more proof that they h**e Obama more than they love America.
I could cover other issues the those on the right distort and lie about; The war on reproductive rights as being really waged by liberals, The immigrants who come to America to get on welfare, The liberal quest to force educators to teach the homosexual agenda in schools, but I think that Ive made my point. The dynamics and motives are always the same; to smear Obama and everything progressive any way they can, regardless of the harm that it may do to the country that they purportedly love. In closing, let me say that this is my call to engage in fact based responsible dialog aimed at finding solutions that work rather than continuing to tear the country apart. Perhaps you may even teach me something
As always , I welcome comments, rebuttals and death threats. Thank you for being offended.
Mar 3, 2013 18:15:48 #
Mar 3, 2013 19:41:14 #
Dear "Voice of Reason" I suggest you get another user name. Either rebut his assertions reasonably or at least admit you are a sophist.
Mar 4, 2013 02:50:32 #
memBrain
Loc: North Carolina (No longer in hiding.)
Rant over? Feel better now? You claim to want an intellectually honest conversation, yet I find you as guilty of failing to use supporting evidence as you claim "conservatives" do. Additionally, you are as inflexible as you claim they are. Furthermore, when facts are submitted to you, you simply reject it. There is nothing further to say on this thread. You are a hypocrite.
Mar 4, 2013 06:17:33 #
Many of on the right feel exactly the same as u feel towards the left, and the beat goes on. Nam Yo Fara On my friend.
Chill you have the Job :)
Chill you have the Job :)
Mar 4, 2013 06:20:09 #
Mar 4, 2013 06:20:47 #
Mar 4, 2013 07:47:11 #
memBrain wrote:
Rant over? Feel better now? You claim to want an intellectually honest conversation, yet I find you as guilty of failing to use supporting evidence as you claim "conservatives" do. Additionally, you are as inflexible as you claim they are. Furthermore, when facts are submitted to you, you simply reject it. There is nothing further to say on this thread. You are a hypocrite.
My "rant" is full of supporting evidence....
Mar 4, 2013 08:53:53 #
Honestly, if you are going to drone on with mindless dribble please do it some place else. You are just not a good writer dude. As for conservatives being angry you need to wake up pal. The liberals are pretty angry too. As for not stating facts. Your entire article is based on your opinion but it is presented as facts when it is not. You state that Obama has NOT spent as much as the right is saying. Yet, they themselves have admitted they have. So who is lying sir? You state that conservatives are hating Obama. Not true. Most conservatives h**e the media because they are not objective at all. (watch media malpractice) A movie by a libertarian that illustrates how they distort the t***h to make the GOP the bad guy. Look at the fabrication of stories by NBC and others. This is what we h**e. Finally, we are saddened that people like you continue to spread lies with a banner that says...oh but you can believe me! I am a smart guy and those people are gun toting bible thumpers....Yeah....you are so smart.
Mar 4, 2013 09:03:10 #
John wrote:
Honestly, if you are going to drone on with mindle... (show quote)
I think that you meant Drivel Whos not a good writer?
Mar 4, 2013 09:33:04 #
Ha...good point. I doubt that you want to go to war on grammer though. I have a pretty large fudge factor when I am debating. I am constantly making silly mistakes....but I do like a good spar..I have to go pick up the welfare check, my new cell phone is needing replaced and I want to go to the E R for some aspirin before I take my illegal cousin to school. So I will be out for awhile. ha
Mar 4, 2013 12:52:35 #
Voice of Reason
Loc: Earth
jpselden wrote:
Dear "Voice of Reason" I suggest you get another user name. Either rebut his assertions reasonably or at least admit you are a sophist.
For those who understand no explanation is necessary, for those who don't none is possible.
Mar 4, 2013 23:22:59 #
I love Our Country and I do believe that Obama has an agenda to change it to a socialized country like foreign countries, which is a sad situation for We the People and Our County. As President, he lies so much, it is getting very hard to believe anything he says, and he changes his stories when things don't go his way. One day he says one thing, then says he didn't say that when it is on tape when he said it. President Obama needs to do the job he was elected to do, and this includes making sure the Government passes a Budget - preferrably - A Balanced Budget, but there has not been a budget for years. This is not the type of Leadership Our Country Needs, Now or Ever!
Mar 5, 2013 01:22:57 #
memBrain
Loc: North Carolina (No longer in hiding.)
TheChardo wrote:
My "rant" is full of supporting evidence....
memBrain wrote:
Rant over? Feel better now? You claim to want an intellectually honest conversation, yet I find you as guilty of failing to use supporting evidence as you claim "conservatives" do. Additionally, you are as inflexible as you claim they are. Furthermore, when facts are submitted to you, you simply reject it. There is nothing further to say on this thread. You are a hypocrite.
My "rant" is full of supporting evidence....
Show it. Your saying "trust me" isn't good enough. Make sure the source is credible and unbiased.
Mar 18, 2013 11:02:35 #
The CPAC....A 2016 freak show preview: http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/10-crazy-things-heard-cpac-giant-right-wing-confab?page=0%2C1
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.