I realize that, in your binary political world, folks are either "conservative" or "liberal".
Crazy enough, some of us belong to neither ideological group. My best guess is that most of us don't, for that matter. Go figure, huh?
Since I clearly need to explain, here we go: It has been my experience that partisan ideologues on both ends of the spectrum have managed to convince themselves that they have a vice-like grip on The Truth.
So, when I see a partisan ideologue making such a claim, I snicker a bit and think:
That's all. You don't have to take it so personally.
.
It's not that I take it personally...it's that I respect and stand up for truth.
Could you explain the parts of the OP that lack truth?
But, personally, for conservatives, data informs policy.
What Kristof is revealing is that the same is not true for Liberal-auspiced welfare policy.
That would depend on what an agreed-to definition of "The Truth" is.
If the definition is, "The truth as I see it from my personal partisan perspective without even a hint of a sincere and reasonable examination of the opposing point of view", then I'd say you're all over the truth. And if you're satisfied with that, then more power to you. Such a definition is inadequate for me.
For the record, I agree with most of the point. But to claim some kind of ownership of The Truth as if it's the whole truth while only providing a part of the debate is intellectually dishonest at best. And that's what I've had enough of from both ends of the political spectrum.
But as an idiot (your term), perhaps my priority on intellectual honesty is a waste of time.
.
Last edited: