Liberals don't believe they hold "opinions." They believe that they are just "right."

[OohPooPahDoo]

Liberals are, less honest, less generous, lazier, and more materialistic than conservatives // Current TV

* Conservatives have a better work ethic and are much less likely to call in sick than their liberal counterparts

That's funny the only conservative room mate I've ever had left myself and my other room mate high and dry with plenty of unpaid rent and bills.

 

[Unkotare]

Well can you tell us, specifically, who were you referring to in the OP?

I was referring to liberals generally in the OP.

And did you ask them what they believed before you claimed to know what they believed?

Ah, you're really not doing well at all. You seem to be confused. When you use the pronoun "them" you suggest specific individuals, which is not what "generally" means. In making a general statement, I provided several examples of things that liberals say very frequently here as the basis for that statement. When specific liberals responded, I then addressed them individually. Are you starting to understand?

 

[Unkotare]

Liberals are, less honest, less generous, lazier, and more materialistic than conservatives // Current TV

* Conservatives have a better work ethic and are much less likely to call in sick than their liberal counterparts

That's funny the only conservative room mate I've ever had left myself and my other room mate high and dry with plenty of unpaid rent and bills.

And you take that anecdote as proof of something?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Liberals are, less honest, less generous, lazier, and more materialistic than conservatives // Current TV

Peter Schweizer (born 1964) is a conservative autho

Peter Schweizer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey did you know that conservatives are 576% more likely than liberals to publish 'studies' just to make them look good?]

Makers and Takers: Why conservatives work harder, feel happier, have closer families, take fewer drugs, give more generously, value honesty more, are less materialistic and envious, whine less … and even hug their children more than liberals, 2008 (ISBN 0-385-51350-X)

LOL!!!!!

Its books like these that the right would have no trouble using to justify gassing anyone who doesn't agree with them.

 

[occupied]

Actually, I claimed you think all Liberals think alike and you get angry at them when they don't.

That's another illogical statement. And you don't know why.

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

This guy has no grasp of logic, he just likes using the word "illogical" so we will think he is smart like Spock or something, any accusation of "illogical" requires a logical explanation.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Liberals are, less honest, less generous, lazier, and more materialistic than conservatives // Current TV

* Conservatives have a better work ethic and are much less likely to call in sick than their liberal counterparts

That's funny the only conservative room mate I've ever had left myself and my other room mate high and dry with plenty of unpaid rent and bills.

And you take that anecdote as proof of something?

You take a book published by a conservative author to be sold to a conservative audience as proof of something?

 

[DontBeStupid]

Liberals are, less honest, less generous, lazier, and more materialistic than conservatives // Current TV

* Conservatives have a better work ethic and are much less likely to call in sick than their liberal counterparts

That's funny the only conservative room mate I've ever had left myself and my other room mate high and dry with plenty of unpaid rent and bills.

Funny. I read that "stat" and immediately thought "Conservatives are more likely to come to work sick and get the entire office sick."

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Ah, you're really not doing well at all. You seem to be confused. When you use the pronoun "them" you suggest specific individuals, which is not what "generally" means.

Actually I am confused. What 3rd plural personal pronoun would have been more appropriate to refer to a group of people than "them" ?

 

[Unkotare]

Actually, I claimed you think all Liberals think alike and you get angry at them when they don't.

That's another illogical statement. And you don't know why.

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

 

[Unkotare]

Ah, you're really not doing well at all. You seem to be confused. When you use the pronoun "them" you suggest specific individuals, which is not what "generally" means.

Actually I am confused. What 3rd plural personal pronoun would have been more appropriate to refer to a group of people than "them" ?

No personal pronoun would be appropriate because, as I have indicated several times now, I was making a generalization and not referring to specific individuals. Come on, you took English class, right?

 

[occupied]

That's another illogical statement. And you don't know why.

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

Look at him, trying to even sound like Spock now.

 

[Unkotare]

That's funny the only conservative room mate I've ever had left myself and my other room mate high and dry with plenty of unpaid rent and bills.

And you take that anecdote as proof of something?

You take a book published by a conservative author to be sold to a conservative audience as proof of something?

I have not done so. Come on now, at least try to think carefully.

 

[SniperFire]

Liberals are, less honest, less generous, lazier, and more materialistic than conservatives // Current TV

Republicans are more self-righteous.

People such as yourself spend your days on websites demanding more free gubmint stuff, and you want to pretend your aren't greedy and self-centered?

LOL

'The fact is that self-described “conservatives” in America are more likely to give—and give more money—than self-described “liberals.” In the year 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more dollars to charity than households headed by a liberal. And this discrepancy in monetary donations is not simply an artifact of income differences. On the contrary, liberal families in these data earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families.

These differences go beyond money. Take blood donations, for example. In 2002, conservative Americans were more likely to donate blood each year, and did so more often, than liberals. People who said they were “conservative” or “extremely conservative” made up less than one-fifth of the population, but donated more than a quarter of the blood. To put this in perspective, if political liberals and moderates gave blood like conservatives do, the blood supply in the United States would surge by nearly half.'

A Nation of Givers — The American Magazine

 

[DontBeStupid]

That's another illogical statement. And you don't know why.

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

Ah, well, then if you're not angry, then you really don't care about this, and that makes my original observation correct.

You're a dick.

 

[Unkotare]

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

Look at him, trying to even sound like Spock now.

Only because, relatively, you sound like Gloop and Gleep. (bonus points if you can pick up the classic cartoon reference!)

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Ah, you're really not doing well at all. You seem to be confused. When you use the pronoun "them" you suggest specific individuals, which is not what "generally" means.

Actually I am confused. What 3rd plural personal pronoun would have been more appropriate to refer to a group of people than "them" ?

No personal pronoun would be appropriate because, as I have indicated several times now, I was making a generalization and not referring to specific individuals. Come on, you took English class, right?

So wait - there's no 3rd person plural pronoun that refers to a group of people? None? Wow.

First they get rid of Pluto as a planet and now they get rid of 3rd person plural pronouns!
Oh- wait - I forget 3rd person plural pronouns no longer exist! I mean to say, first the astronomers tell us Pluto is no longer a planet, and now the English teachers get rid of 3rd person plural pronouns!

(BTW, you're a total fucking moron)

 

[Unkotare]

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

Ah, well, then if you're not angry, then you really don't care about this, and that makes my original observation correct.

You're a dick.

As expected, your argument has completely fallen apart and you are just lashing out.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

People such as yourself spend your days on websites demanding more free gubmint stuff

Link?

, and you want to pretend your aren't greedy and self-centered?

And you want to make a statement like that and pretend you aren't self-righteous?

'The fact is that self-described “conservatives” in America are more likely to give—and give more money—than self-described “liberals.” In the year 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more dollars to charity than households headed by a liberal. And this discrepancy in monetary donations is not simply an artifact of income differences. On the contrary, liberal families in these data earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families.

And who gets to define what counts as a charity in these studies? I'm guessing its a conservative that gets to make that call. How convenient! Just remember we're the smug faced ones, right?

By Arthur C. Brooks

(conservative) Why do righties post the same study a hundred different times and post links to the same study posted on different websites and pretend like its multiple studies? Then entire premise is based on a single study by Arthur C. Brooks, the President of a conservative think tank. In fact one idiot right winger on this board posted 4 different links as if they were all different studies but every single one of them led back to the same one by Arthur C Brooks.

 

[francoHFW]

The fact that you try to pawn off that opinion to Current TV shows YOU'RE dishonst or idiotic. It's always hard to tell with the dupes/Pubs...

It's that RW circle jerk again of RW hacks/propagandists/charlatans reinforcing each other, much like the Rep obsession of the dupes on here. Pathetic.

 

[occupied]

Nope. It's 100% logical. Nice try though.

No, I'm sorry, but it's not. You made a claim about an internal emotional response which you obviously cannot confirm. That is illogical, as your conclusion cannot be supported. You also based your claim on the predicate "when they don't," without either proving this causal relationship or providing any example of same. In fact, the liberals who have responded here have confirmed my initial claim and therefore cannot be held as proof of yours. Again, illogical.

If you require any further education on logic and discourse I'm going to have to start charging you money.

Ah, well, then if you're not angry, then you really don't care about this, and that makes my original observation correct.

You're a dick.

Is there any other reason for them to be here? They never learn anything or seem to be interested in anything anyone says, being a dick is fun sometimes but being a total dick would get boring to anyone with a shred of intellectual curiosity.