Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Liberal candidates have always been rejected by the American public. Obama just did an outstanding job of bamboozling the public.
If the American people knew that they know now back in the summer and fall of 2008, we'd still be looking for our first black president.
Conservatives say "let me live my life the way I want to live my life, and you live your life the way you want to live your life
If that were true, conservatives would not be opposed to gay marriage, legalizing drugs, and abortion, among other things. Conservatives are certainly not a live and let live crowd and neither are so called liberals. Both groups try to force others to live within their parameters of morality.
1. An example of a moral truth is keeping ones' word. Another is the truth that an intact family is better for individuals, and for society. Expecially compared to many alternative contemporary lifestyles. The dissolution of the family unit, and of marriage is demonstrably responsible for much of the crime problem.
nothing was allowed to interfere with an individuals right to instant gratification.
2. When morality became privatized, the questions what is right became what is right for me. Feelings rather than reason became the arbiters of behavior.
Rather than traditional taboos, only religiously based moral judgment was deemed taboo.
The harm caused to abandoned spouses or children by adultery or desertion- harm that can be objectively documented in rates of ill health, depression, educational underachievement, criminal behavior-
We tell ourselves that we stand for human rights, freedom, democracy, tolerance- yet we cannot uphold these principles because we espouse multiculturalism, and, therefore, to prefer one culture over another is racist or xenophobic.
Thus, a liberal society, by definition, cannot defend itself and must, apparently, accept its own obliteration.
Now, a tutorial for your edification:
1) Conservatives believe that there are moral truths, right and wrong, and that these truths are permanent. The result of infracting these truths will be atrocities and social disaster. Liberals believe in a privatization of morality so complete that no code of conduct is generally accepted, practically to the point of do what you can get away with. These beliefs are aimed at the gratification of appetites and exhibit anarchistic impulses.
These "unchanging" moral truths include:
infidelity is an impeachable offense, except when it's done by 3 different republican majority leaders from the House who are impeaching a president for infidelity". Then, it's a "youthful indiscretion" even if they're 40 years old.
Marriage is "sacred" and needs protection so Michael Jackson could marry Elvis' baby girl.
receiving money from the govt and not doing anything in return breeds dependency, unless you're a half-term governor of Alaska
abstinence only sex ed works, and if you doubt it, just ask the unwed mother who wants to be a spokesperson for pro-life crowd
2) Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent. Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke).
This is why they opposed the abolition of slavery, the integration of our military, the abolition of Jim Crow, and the teaching of evolution
For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past
Because in wingnut world, getting rid of most of the govt is not a "quick change" and they hate it when taxes go down fast. And of course, bushs' invasion of Iraq was "prudent"
Conservatives don't believe in choice. Conservatives support monopolies which offer no choice because the "free market" allows monopolies. Conservatives believe in "choice" like chickens believe in KFC
Conservatives believe in free markets, where there is no need for choice. That's why they oppose choice in sex ed in schools and demand "abstinence only". That's why they don't want women to have the choice to abort their pregnancy. That's why they don't want people to have the choice to join a union.
That's why Sweden is such a hotbed of dissent while Afghanistan, which allows private property, is such a peaceful land
Which is why you'll never hear Palin complain about the oil royalty checks she gets every year just for having babies. It's why the teabaggers insist that the govt keep their hands of Medicare.
Which is why they believe in a Unitary Executive and why they beleive that signing statements have the force of law. It's why they supported the PATRIOT Act. To put a check on govt power
For conservatives, "data" =
Obama is a socialist
Obama is a fascist
Obama is a Kenyan
Obama is Muslim who is a follower of a radical Christian clergyman
9) Conservatives view results differently from Liberals. Liberals respond to success and material wealth with envy and hostility, encourage class warfare and an attempt to obviate any chance that it might happen again. The exception is when it is a Liberal with the wealth. Conservatives see success as the validation and culmination of the application of Conservative principles, most prominently Liberty.
Conservatives hate it when poor people get money. It's why they hate the BP escrow fund.
10) Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts, nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.
This last one is too self-referential for me
Now you are presented with a fact that proves your post to be no more that hallucinatory self-gratification:
"A new book, titled Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks examines the actual behavior of liberals and conservatives when it comes to donating their own time, money, or blood for the benefit of others.
People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.
It is not that conservatives have more money. Liberal families average 6 percent higher incomes than conservative families.
So is the fact that most of the states that voted for John Kerry during the 2004 election donated a lower percentage of their incomes to charity than the states that voted for George W. Bush.
Conservatives not only donate more money to charity than liberals do, conservatives volunteer more time as well. More conservatives than liberals also donate blood.
According to Professor Brooks: "If liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply of the United States would jump about 45 percent."
This study found young liberals to make the least charitable contributions of all, whether in money, time or blood. Idealism in words is not idealism in deeds."
Who Really Cares? - Thomas Sowell - National Review Online
Kind of makes your post look foolish, doesn't it?
Care to comment? Or retract?
I've heard this bullshit before and as soon as you start analyzing, it takes on an entirely different perspective.
For every dollar given to the federal government in a red state, they get more than a dollar back.
For every dollar given to the federal government in a blue state, they get less than a dollar back.
We know these statement to be true. The data has been posted many times on this board.
6% of scientists are Republican.
So what does all this prove? In the red states, poor people are just given money.
In the blue states, people are investments. There is a move to educate. To improve. Education is repsected.
So while it SEEMS that Republican give more, their quality of giving is much, much less.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will feed his family for life. (Except in the gulf. Deregulation has fucked that up.)
As usual, you haven't done the research...of course that never stops you from forming an opinion...but
Deanie-weanie, I have good news for you!
Southwest found yours!
"A Southwest Airlines employee called police after finding human heads in a package set to be transported to a Fort Worth medical research company, the airline said.
Heads on a Plane! | NBC Dallas-Fort Worth
1. An example of a moral truth is keeping ones' word. Another is the truth that an intact family is better for individuals, and for society. Expecially compared to many alternative contemporary lifestyles. The dissolution of the family unit, and of marriage is demonstrably responsible for much of the crime problem.
Ok prove that that is responsible for most crime.
Although what crime problem? Crime is on the downswing and it's been that way for a while.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - All Key Facts
Notice the drastic falling in rape robbery murder etc.
You said earlier about how oh conservatives are ok with things being different and liberals wanted to make everything the same yet here you are saying that if people don't follow your approved version of a family or your approved lifestyle it will lead to economic and moral collapse and all sorts of other doomsday scenarios. What proof is there of any of this? Nothing. You want the government to endorse your preferred family style as if it were proven to be the best (and it hasn't) and if other people have it differently you want to pretend they'll bring down society.
It's such an extraordinary claim and I don't see any sort of evidence for it.
nothing was allowed to interfere with an individuals right to instant gratification.
What crap the 60s weren't in anarchy, and hardly anyone was proposing anarchy.
So wait do you want morality based in reason or based in a religion no one can objectively prove?
Can you objectively prove causation yes or no?
We tell ourselves that we stand for human rights, freedom, democracy, tolerance- yet we cannot uphold these principles because we espouse multiculturalism, and, therefore, to prefer one culture over another is racist or xenophobic.
Nice straw men, now kindly point to someone who says we must embrace every culture (including cultures of intolerance like say radical Islam)?
Thus, a liberal society, by definition, cannot defend itself and must, apparently, accept its own obliteration.
Holy non-sequiter. So defending yourself against attack is xenopohobic or racist? WTF? Have you actually talked to liberals or do you just let non-liberals tell you what they believe?
Now, a tutorial for your edification:
1) Conservatives believe that there are moral truths, right and wrong, and that these truths are permanent. The result of infracting these truths will be atrocities and social disaster. Liberals believe in a privatization of morality so complete that no code of conduct is generally accepted, practically to the point of do what you can get away with. These beliefs are aimed at the gratification of appetites and exhibit anarchistic impulses.
These "unchanging" moral truths include:
infidelity is an impeachable offense, except when it's done by 3 different republican majority leaders from the House who are impeaching a president for infidelity". Then, it's a "youthful indiscretion" even if they're 40 years old.
Marriage is "sacred" and needs protection so Michael Jackson could marry Elvis' baby girl.
receiving money from the govt and not doing anything in return breeds dependency, unless you're a half-term governor of Alaska
abstinence only sex ed works, and if you doubt it, just ask the unwed mother who wants to be a spokesperson for pro-life crowd
This is why they opposed the abolition of slavery, the integration of our military, the abolition of Jim Crow, and the teaching of evolution
For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past
Because in wingnut world, getting rid of most of the govt is not a "quick change" and they hate it when taxes go down fast. And of course, bushs' invasion of Iraq was "prudent"
Conservatives don't believe in choice. Conservatives support monopolies which offer no choice because the "free market" allows monopolies. Conservatives believe in "choice" like chickens believe in KFC
Conservatives believe in free markets, where there is no need for choice. That's why they oppose choice in sex ed in schools and demand "abstinence only". That's why they don't want women to have the choice to abort their pregnancy. That's why they don't want people to have the choice to join a union.
That's why Sweden is such a hotbed of dissent while Afghanistan, which allows private property, is such a peaceful land
Which is why you'll never hear Palin complain about the oil royalty checks she gets every year just for having babies. It's why the teabaggers insist that the govt keep their hands of Medicare.
Which is why they believe in a Unitary Executive and why they beleive that signing statements have the force of law. It's why they supported the PATRIOT Act. To put a check on govt power
For conservatives, "data" =
Obama is a socialist
Obama is a fascist
Obama is a Kenyan
Obama is Muslim who is a follower of a radical Christian clergyman
Conservatives hate it when poor people get money. It's why they hate the BP escrow fund.
10) Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts, nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.
This last one is too self-referential for me
I must say that I appreciate your tenacity, as most have not gone through my essay as thoroughly! Consider trying 3 through 8, as well.
Bravo.
Of course, most of your responses are in error.
For example, the history of Progressives/liberals is the racist history. I wrote a monograph on one of these threads proving same, and if you feel it necessary, I will document again that premise.
As is your false idea that President Bush, as some kind of monarch, took us into Iraq. A quick look through the chronology will show a joint effort by both parties and agreement by most nations.
Your silliness shine through in :"infidelity is an impeachable offense, except when it's done by 3 different republican majority leaders from the House who are impeaching a president for infidelity". Then, it's a "youthful indiscretion" even if they're 40 years old."
Can you name someone who was impeached for infidelity?
Of course you cannot.
Can you name "3 different republican majority leaders from the House " who were about to be impeached?
Sophomoric.
So, let me tell you what comes through via your post.
1. My outline of the differences between general conservative thought, and liberal thought, rang true for you.
2. You felt the need to respond, defend, even if your response made little sense, and was proveably untrue.
3. You have believed your false dogma for so long that the virtual lobotomy would be fatal to the world view that you have constructed, and so you would rather rant than learn.
I'll leave you with this hope: each year there are 365 opportunities to start over.
1. An example of a moral truth is keeping ones' word. Another is the truth that an intact family is better for individuals, and for society. Expecially compared to many alternative contemporary lifestyles. The dissolution of the family unit, and of marriage is demonstrably responsible for much of the crime problem.
Ok prove that that is responsible for most crime.
Although what crime problem? Crime is on the downswing and it's been that way for a while.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - All Key Facts
Notice the drastic falling in rape robbery murder etc.
You said earlier about how oh conservatives are ok with things being different and liberals wanted to make everything the same yet here you are saying that if people don't follow your approved version of a family or your approved lifestyle it will lead to economic and moral collapse and all sorts of other doomsday scenarios. What proof is there of any of this? Nothing. You want the government to endorse your preferred family style as if it were proven to be the best (and it hasn't) and if other people have it differently you want to pretend they'll bring down society.
It's such an extraordinary claim and I don't see any sort of evidence for it.
What crap the 60s weren't in anarchy, and hardly anyone was proposing anarchy.
So wait do you want morality based in reason or based in a religion no one can objectively prove?
Can you objectively prove causation yes or no?
Nice straw men, now kindly point to someone who says we must embrace every culture (including cultures of intolerance like say radical Islam)?
Thus, a liberal society, by definition, cannot defend itself and must, apparently, accept its own obliteration.
Holy non-sequiter. So defending yourself against attack is xenopohobic or racist? WTF? Have you actually talked to liberals or do you just let non-liberals tell you what they believe?
My response is succinctly summarized in Matthew 7:6.
1. An example of a moral truth is keeping ones' word. Another is the truth that an intact family is better for individuals, and for society. Expecially compared to many alternative contemporary lifestyles. The dissolution of the family unit, and of marriage is demonstrably responsible for much of the crime problem.
Ok prove that that is responsible for most crime.
Although what crime problem? Crime is on the downswing and it's been that way for a while.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - All Key Facts
Notice the drastic falling in rape robbery murder etc.
You said earlier about how oh conservatives are ok with things being different and liberals wanted to make everything the same yet here you are saying that if people don't follow your approved version of a family or your approved lifestyle it will lead to economic and moral collapse and all sorts of other doomsday scenarios. What proof is there of any of this? Nothing. You want the government to endorse your preferred family style as if it were proven to be the best (and it hasn't) and if other people have it differently you want to pretend they'll bring down society.
It's such an extraordinary claim and I don't see any sort of evidence for it.
What crap the 60s weren't in anarchy, and hardly anyone was proposing anarchy.
So wait do you want morality based in reason or based in a religion no one can objectively prove?
Can you objectively prove causation yes or no?
Nice straw men, now kindly point to someone who says we must embrace every culture (including cultures of intolerance like say radical Islam)?
Thus, a liberal society, by definition, cannot defend itself and must, apparently, accept its own obliteration.
Holy non-sequiter. So defending yourself against attack is xenopohobic or racist? WTF? Have you actually talked to liberals or do you just let non-liberals tell you what they believe?
My response is succinctly summarized in Matthew 7:6.
I've heard this bullshit before and as soon as you start analyzing, it takes on an entirely different perspective.
For every dollar given to the federal government in a red state, they get more than a dollar back.
For every dollar given to the federal government in a blue state, they get less than a dollar back.
We know these statement to be true. The data has been posted many times on this board.
6% of scientists are Republican.
So what does all this prove? In the red states, poor people are just given money.
In the blue states, people are investments. There is a move to educate. To improve. Education is repsected.
So while it SEEMS that Republican give more, their quality of giving is much, much less.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will feed his family for life. (Except in the gulf. Deregulation has fucked that up.)
As usual, you haven't done the research...of course that never stops you from forming an opinion...but
Deanie-weanie, I have good news for you!
Southwest found yours!
"A Southwest Airlines employee called police after finding human heads in a package set to be transported to a Fort Worth medical research company, the airline said.
Heads on a Plane! | NBC Dallas-Fort Worth
The problem with you, my blond and myopic friend, is that you assume giving money to Christian charities is the "best" way to give money.
Think about these groups that "Save the Whales" or "Peta" or donate money for cancer research or Parkinson's Research or money given to Universities? These funds don't come from rural country Christians. The money going to these causes are every bit as good as money just being given to poor white people to keep their heads above the water. TEACH THEM TO SWIM. The difference between the right and the left, those on the right teach "mysticism" and "religion", those on the left teach people how to make a good living.
That's the problem with right wingers. They just assume they are the most "moral". That their way is the best. Well, they aren't and it isn't.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ii1XsBdtpfY]YouTube - World of warcraft: Hot Dumb Blondes[/ame]
As usual, you haven't done the research...of course that never stops you from forming an opinion...but
Deanie-weanie, I have good news for you!
Southwest found yours!
"A Southwest Airlines employee called police after finding human heads in a package set to be transported to a Fort Worth medical research company, the airline said.
Heads on a Plane! | NBC Dallas-Fort Worth
The problem with you, my blond and myopic friend, is that you assume giving money to Christian charities is the "best" way to give money.
Think about these groups that "Save the Whales" or "Peta" or donate money for cancer research or Parkinson's Research or money given to Universities? These funds don't come from rural country Christians. The money going to these causes are every bit as good as money just being given to poor white people to keep their heads above the water. TEACH THEM TO SWIM. The difference between the right and the left, those on the right teach "mysticism" and "religion", those on the left teach people how to make a good living.
That's the problem with right wingers. They just assume they are the most "moral". That their way is the best. Well, they aren't and it isn't.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ii1XsBdtpfY]YouTube - World of warcraft: Hot Dumb Blondes[/ame]
1. To begin with, charitable giving in America has never been the exclusive province of wealthy people. Throughout our history, Americans from all walks of life have given generously for charitable causes. Indeed, the most generous Americans today—the group that gives the most to charity as a proportion of their income—are the working poor.
2. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
3. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipment—equipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
4. Three reasons why America is the most charitable country on earth.
a. First, we are the most religious people of any leading modern economy. The single most important determinant of charitable giving is active religious faith and observance. Americans who attend church or synagogue or another form of worship once a week give three times as much to charity as a percentage of their income as do those who rarely attend religious services. One-third of all charitable giving in America—$100 billion a year—goes to religion. They also give more to secular charities than do those who never or rarely attend religious services.
b. A second reason America is so charitable is because we respect the freedom and the ability of individuals, and associations of individuals, to make a difference. . Americans don’t wait for government or the local nobleman to solve our problems; we find solutions ourselves
c. The third reason for our extraordinary charity is that philanthropy is such an important part of our nation’s business culture. Wealth creation and philanthropy have always gone together in America. They are reflections of the creativity and can-do spirit of a free society.
i. When Tom Siebel sold software giant Siebel Systems to Oracle, he decided to apply his business and marketing skills to another cause—fighting the devastation of Crystal Meth. He created and financed the Montana Meth Project, and as a result teen Meth abuse in Montana has fallen by 63 percent in three years.
ii. The late Don Fisher and his widow Doris were the philanthropic architects of the Knowledge is Power Program, which is a network of 80 schools across the country where low-income children excel. They were also the earliest large-scale supporters of Teach for America. Using the same principles that enabled them to build the Gap retail chain, the Fishers have built extraordinary philanthropic brands.
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01
"For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past"
This a thousand times this.
Europe hasn't collapsed and it's had gay marriage for how long?
It's just like the Y2K/6-6-06/2012 doomsday crap. They've been wrong every single time they predicted collapse and yet that doesn't stop them from doing it again and again.
"For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past"
This a thousand times this.
Europe hasn't collapsed and it's had gay marriage for how long?
It's just like the Y2K/6-6-06/2012 doomsday crap. They've been wrong every single time they predicted collapse and yet that doesn't stop them from doing it again and again.
I guess it's time for me to issue my periodic challenge to the wingnuts
Please name one nation that became prosperous by implementing a conservative economic policy of no govt interference in the economy, no regulation, and low taxes?
The cowardly right will never give a reasonable answer to this because there is none.
"For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past"
This a thousand times this.
Europe hasn't collapsed and it's had gay marriage for how long?
It's just like the Y2K/6-6-06/2012 doomsday crap. They've been wrong every single time they predicted collapse and yet that doesn't stop them from doing it again and again.
I guess it's time for me to issue my periodic challenge to the wingnuts
Please name one nation that became prosperous by implementing a conservative economic policy of no govt interference in the economy, no regulation, and low taxes?
The cowardly right will never give a reasonable answer to this because there is none.
Oh come on they're not all complete lassiez-faire just as not all liberals are complete socialists.
Anyway you'd think it would take a lot to collapse society instead of just a different style of family.
"For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past"
This a thousand times this.
Europe hasn't collapsed and it's had gay marriage for how long?
It's just like the Y2K/6-6-06/2012 doomsday crap. They've been wrong every single time they predicted collapse and yet that doesn't stop them from doing it again and again.
I guess it's time for me to issue my periodic challenge to the wingnuts
Please name one nation that became prosperous by implementing a conservative economic policy of no govt interference in the economy, no regulation, and low taxes?
The cowardly right will never give a reasonable answer to this because there is none.
The problem with you, my blond and myopic friend, is that you assume giving money to Christian charities is the "best" way to give money.
Think about these groups that "Save the Whales" or "Peta" or donate money for cancer research or Parkinson's Research or money given to Universities? These funds don't come from rural country Christians. The money going to these causes are every bit as good as money just being given to poor white people to keep their heads above the water. TEACH THEM TO SWIM. The difference between the right and the left, those on the right teach "mysticism" and "religion", those on the left teach people how to make a good living.
That's the problem with right wingers. They just assume they are the most "moral". That their way is the best. Well, they aren't and it isn't.
YouTube - World of warcraft: Hot Dumb Blondes
1. To begin with, charitable giving in America has never been the exclusive province of wealthy people. Throughout our history, Americans from all walks of life have given generously for charitable causes. Indeed, the most generous Americans todaythe group that gives the most to charity as a proportion of their incomeare the working poor.
2. Private charitable giving is also at the heart and soul of public discourse in our democracy. It makes possible our great think tanks, whether left, right or center. Name a great issue of public debate today: climate change, the role of government in health care, school choice, stem cell research, same-sex marriage. On all these issues, private philanthropy enriches debate by enabling organizations with diverse viewpoints to articulate and spread their message.
3. Last year Americans gave $300 billion to charity. To put this into perspective, that is almost twice what we spent on consumer electronics equipmentequipment including cell phones, iPods and DVD players. Americans gave three times as much to charity last year as we spent on gambling and ten times as much as we spent on professional sports. America is by far the most charitable country in the world. There is no other country that comes close.
4. Three reasons why America is the most charitable country on earth.
a. First, we are the most religious people of any leading modern economy. The single most important determinant of charitable giving is active religious faith and observance. Americans who attend church or synagogue or another form of worship once a week give three times as much to charity as a percentage of their income as do those who rarely attend religious services. One-third of all charitable giving in America$100 billion a yeargoes to religion. They also give more to secular charities than do those who never or rarely attend religious services.
b. A second reason America is so charitable is because we respect the freedom and the ability of individuals, and associations of individuals, to make a difference. . Americans dont wait for government or the local nobleman to solve our problems; we find solutions ourselves
c. The third reason for our extraordinary charity is that philanthropy is such an important part of our nations business culture. Wealth creation and philanthropy have always gone together in America. They are reflections of the creativity and can-do spirit of a free society.
i. When Tom Siebel sold software giant Siebel Systems to Oracle, he decided to apply his business and marketing skills to another causefighting the devastation of Crystal Meth. He created and financed the Montana Meth Project, and as a result teen Meth abuse in Montana has fallen by 63 percent in three years.
ii. The late Don Fisher and his widow Doris were the philanthropic architects of the Knowledge is Power Program, which is a network of 80 schools across the country where low-income children excel. They were also the earliest large-scale supporters of Teach for America. Using the same principles that enabled them to build the Gap retail chain, the Fishers have built extraordinary philanthropic brands.
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2010&month=01
Your "original quote"
***********
Now you are presented with a fact that proves your post to be no more that hallucinatory self-gratification:
"A new book, titled Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks examines the actual behavior of liberals and conservatives when it comes to donating their own time, money, or blood for the benefit of others.
People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.
It is not that conservatives have more money. Liberal families average 6 percent higher incomes than conservative families.
So is the fact that most of the states that voted for John Kerry during the 2004 election donated a lower percentage of their incomes to charity than the states that voted for George W. Bush.
Conservatives not only donate more money to charity than liberals do, conservatives volunteer more time as well. More conservatives than liberals also donate blood.
According to Professor Brooks: "If liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply of the United States would jump about 45 percent."
This study found young liberals to make the least charitable contributions of all, whether in money, time or blood. Idealism in words is not idealism in deeds."
Who Really Cares? - Thomas Sowell - National Review Online
Kind of makes your post look foolish, doesn't it?
Care to comment? Or retract?
****************
No, it doesn't make me look foolish.
You asked for a comment and I gave you one.
Take the 300 billion in charitable contributions. OK, say that 55% came from the right. That's the majority. That leaves the other 45% to the left.
PLUS, the left gives money to causes the right rarely would. And I listed several.
Example, do you think the "National Endowments for the Arts" is a cause right wingers would give money to? And the NEA supports programs in rural areas, inner cities, and military bases. But it's NOT considered "charity".
The left gives money to scientific institutions that searches for real solutions to disease and how to combat many of the effects of poverty and want. The right gives millions to the now defunct "creation museum". Neither is considered a "charity".
Those on the right, including you, want to believe that "Christian Charities" are the "best" and do the "best" work. That they are oh so good and so "moral. Passing out food and Bibles doesn't make it so. And sure, some of those groups might teach "farming" or some basic skill, but like I said, helping people barely keep their heads above the water is NOT teaching them how to swim.
"For all their predictions of doom, their predictions never come true, and they have no examples of it ever happening in the past"
This a thousand times this.
Europe hasn't collapsed and it's had gay marriage for how long?
It's just like the Y2K/6-6-06/2012 doomsday crap. They've been wrong every single time they predicted collapse and yet that doesn't stop them from doing it again and again.
I guess it's time for me to issue my periodic challenge to the wingnuts
Please name one nation that became prosperous by implementing a conservative economic policy of no govt interference in the economy, no regulation, and low taxes?
The cowardly right will never give a reasonable answer to this because there is none.
