Digging into Conservative 'values'

[Father Time]

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.

So what you're a psychic now?

Although it's funny that you're quick to somehow disregard reality if it doesn't match what you think should happen.

Obama got elected and he (according to you) is a liberal. Wait somehow he doesn't count because you don't want him to. It's the always changing goalposts.

Did Obama ever run as a conservative?

 

[PoliticalChic]

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.

You are either misleading, or mislead.

On what basis to you state that it is necessary to be "opposed to gay marriage, legalizing drugs, and abortion," in order to be construed to be a consevative?

"PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans' views on same-sex marriage have essentially stayed the same in the past year, with a majority of 57% opposed to granting such marriages legal status and 40% in favor of doing so. Though support for legal same-sex marriage is significantly higher now than when Gallup first asked about it in 1996, in recent years support has appeared to stall, peaking at 46% in 2007."http://www.gallup.com/poll/118378/majority-americans-continue-oppose-gay-marriage.aspx

Do you wish to argue that 57% of the country is conservative?

And...
"PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup's October Crime poll finds 44% of Americans in favor of making marijuana legal and 54% opposed. U.S. public support for legalizing marijuana was fixed in the 25% range from the late 1970s to the mid-1990s, but acceptance jumped to 31% in 2000 and has continued to grow throughout this decade."
U.S. Support for Legalizing Marijuana Reaches New High

And...
"PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Poll, conducted May 7-10, finds 51% of Americans calling themselves "pro-life" on the issue of abortion and 42% "pro-choice." This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995."
More Americans ?Pro-Life? Than ?Pro-Choice? for First Time


My point is that, while more likely to be conservative than liberal, none of these represent litmus tests to be a conservative. Earlier in the thread I outlined what I believe are conservative viewpoints.

Your post appears to be somewhere between 'strawman'- easy to be opposed to- and bumper sticker level of thought.

BTW, "that 40 percent of Americans call themselves conservative, while 36 percent identify as moderate and 21 percent identify as liberal." Also Gallup.


And, "A majority of 53% of Democrats have a positive image of socialism, compared to 17% of Republicans.
Sixty-one percent of liberals say their image of socialism is positive, compared to 39% of moderates and 20% of conservatives."
Would you like to make a broad-brush statement such as 'Democrats are socialists'?


This is from my earlier post: "Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. "
Doesn't sound much like your "Conservatives are certainly not a live and let live crowd."

 

[Father Time]

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 individual’s right to instant gratification.

What crap the 60s weren't in anarchy, and hardly anyone was proposing anarchy.

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.

So wait do you want morality based in reason or based in a religion no one can objectively prove?

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-

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?

 

[PoliticalChic]

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

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.

 

[Father Time]

"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.

 

[rdean]

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

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]

 

[PoliticalChic]

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 individual’s 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?

My response is succinctly summarized in Matthew 7:6.

 

[Father Time]

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.

He responded to most of your points, you responded to one.

You keep saying how his responses or your points are provably true/untrue but you've never proved it.

No instead you just prefer to basically sling around accusations. I wonder what that says about you.

 

[rdean]

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.

Bow wow. You prove my point about religion.

Don't get me started on Bible quotes because I love them. They are so weird.

Ephesians 6:5 NLT Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.

1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.

 

[Father Time]

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.

So you refuse to defend your points then.

 

[PoliticalChic]

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]

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

 

[Father Time]

"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"

Not that I think you're lying but this is really surprising, considering the massive size difference between say a Best Buy and a Salvation Army building. Where'd you get these numbers?

 

[rdean]

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

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.

 

[sangha]

"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.

 

[Father Time]

"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.

 

[sangha]

"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.

They're not complete free market because they're not completely anything aside from complete hypocrits.

But "free markets" is the slogan they chose for themselves. **** em if it bites them in the ass.

 

[Flaylo]

Conservatives are hypocrites, they like regulating the lives of other peoples as a benefit and profit to themselves like with abortion but take a libertarian view when they want to skirt around the law and use the Constitution for example with gun rights, they can't regulate call for regulating abortion and advocate prayer in schools and then turn around and claim state"s rights and invoke the 2nd Amendment when it comes to gun rights.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"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.

My poor, sadly mistaken friend, the creation of an absurd premise, and attributing it to you opponent, so that it can be knocked down, is less than juvenile, but certainly worthy of a dolt such as you.

I outline conservative thinking in ...I believe it was post #2...have someone who is beyound grade school explain each to you, and then you will see why "a conservative economic policy of no govt interference in the economy, no regulation, and low taxes" belongs not.

In simplest terms, I state what I belive, and you state what you believe, not the opposite. Then we can attack the others' point of view. That is the protocol.

You don't get to tell me what I beleive, and that applies even to those with an intellect.

But, as an exponent of obscurantism, you may have a difficult time with this idea.

 

[PoliticalChic]

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 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

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.

First, "Bow wow. You prove my point about religion." What point would that be? I merely expressed my disapproval of FatherTime.


Now as for charity, I documented the numbers and showed that charity is not necessarily of a religious nature. So ""Christian Charities" are the "best" seems to be, as is your specialty, nonsense.


An in " 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. " you have documented only that bloviation is another of your hallmarks.
Data?
Documentation?
Proof beyound bumper stickers?

None.

And if the left is best at efforts to " combat many of the effects of poverty " is the mark of the left, please explain why so many locales, Detroit comes to mind, which have been run by the left for decades, are rife with crime and poverty?

So let's review:
1. The right gives more than the left, in money, time and blood.
2. For the left, giving other peoples' money is considered charity.
3. Even though the left has more money, they refuse to part with it to help others.
4. Religious folk are clearly the most charitable.


Now, write soon, deanie-weanie.

 

[Foxfyre]

"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.

Since there is no country that has become prosperous using your description, one cannot be named. But the country you described is a non sequitur since nobody else has described such a country.

However, there has been a country that became the world's most free, most productive, most innovative, most compassionate, and most prosperous implementing the conservative principles of the government taking no more in taxes than it absolutely had to have to fulfill its Consitutional obligations and imposing no more regulation than was necessary to secure the rights of the people.

That country was the United States.

The Left began chipping away at those conservative policies beginning in the T Roosevelt administration, however, and continued ever since, gradually building momentum, until we have the chaotic mess that we currently have.

The only remedy for the mess is to begin rewinding to those earlier conservative values and principles if there is a national will to do so.