Explaining Conservatives

[occupied]

And for all the money conservatives spend, for all the Fox news broadcasts, for all the Limbaughs, and for all their attempts to take the world and America back to the past, America still travels on its liberal way. each 100 years a little more liberal than the last 100 years.

I guess it will always be that way as the last generation's radical progressive changes become commonplace and then finally a hard fought conservative tradition.

 

[Truthmatters]

you cant answer can you pc?

Of course I can.

I prove you to be ignorant regularly.

Need so, once again?



OK, OK....




"New Analysis Shows Voter Identification Laws Do Not Reduce Turnout
The findings of this analysis suggest that voter identification requirements, such as requiring non-photo and photo identification, have virtually no suppressive effect on reported voter turnout.

And....

CONCLUSION
Controlling for factors that influence voter turn*out, voter identification laws largely do not have the claimed negative impact on voter turnout based on state-to-state comparisons. When statistically signif*icant and negative relationships are found, the effects are so small that the findings offer little policy significance. White survey respondents in photo identification states are 0.002 percent less likely to report voting than white respondents from states that only required voters to state their name. Afri*can-American respondents in non-photo identifica*tion states are 0.012 percent less likely to report voting than African-American respondents from states that only required voters to state their name.

In other cases, no effect was found. In general, respondents in photo identification and non-photo identification states are just as likely to report voting compared to respondents from states that only required voters to state their name. African-Ameri*can respondents in photo identification states are just as likely to report voting compared to African- American respondents from states that only required voters to state their name. Hispanic respondents in photo identification states are just as likely to report voting compared to Hispanic respondents from states that only required voters to state their name."
New Analysis Shows Voter Identification Laws Do Not Reduce Turnout

from the heritage foundation?




are you insane?

 

[Truthmatters]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw]Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube[/ame]

this is the founder of the heritage foundation

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

And, this responds exactly how to the OP, Ms Truthmatters....?

Ooop! So sorry....I do get you two confused due to the similarity in presentations.

Many here predicted a Romney landslide.

I did, too.

Seems I gave the electorate far too much credit.
........

Is that the same thing as just being plain fucking wrong? Bahahahhaa.....You didn't give anybody credit except Karl Rove, who TOLD you Romney was going to win.

Save the SuperWoman suit though....there's always Halloween.

Rove predicts Romney victory with at least 279 Electoral College votes | TheHill

 

[Truthmatters]

that guy masterminded all the decades of republican cheating you willy git

 

[TooTall]

How do we judge the nature of strangers, or those we know only in passing?

Simply by assuming them to be most like the individual we know the best. That is the measuring stick we use to estimate.
Hence, the old saying 'we can only judge others by ourselves.'

What would we do in similar circumstances, how would we act, what would we say?
That's human nature.




1. I find this most explicative when one on the other side of the political divide calls the other a liar.
I don't lie. But I have found that those who do so regularly are the quickest to jump to this accusation.

Nor is it a surprise to find that those on the Left, the Liberal folks, are the fastest on the draw in this respect.





2. Another character difference between the two political persuasions is individualism. It is one of the cornerstones of conservatism, and the 'sotto voce' of America's founding documents. We want to make our own decisions.

The other side seems to feel that we lack the capability, and they should do this for us. That's why Liberal folks leap to ban things that they don't like, and use judicial decree to overturn voter's opinions.

And that goes right back to judging others by ourselves.
Liberals must feel that they need experts to 'advise' them what the right things to do are.
When Liberals hear the words ‘studies show,’ or ‘experts say,’ they cease to ‘question authority.’





3. And speaking of judging others by oneself, it seems to me a constant calumny by Liberals that Rush Limbaugh and Fox News tell right-wingers, and conservatives what to think....but I never hear conservatives claiming that those on the Left are 'programmed' by the ubiquitous variations on MSNBC or the NYTimes that echo throughout our secular society.
Why is that?

Kinda sounds like the Left is trying to prevent the reality from becoming broadcast....i.e., they are the ones who march lock-step, following orders.





4. Another difference is preparation, knowledge,...or perhaps that related to item #3.
Conservatives know more about what's going on....in fact, if Liberals knew as many of the ingredients in a story as conservatives do, they'd probably be conservatives. Instead, when they're told things they didn't know, they shout "liar!"

Examples? Sure....

a. "Stephanopoulos appeared on The Sean Hannity Show and New York radio station WOR's The Steve Malzberg Show, where both Hannity and Malzberg suggested to Stephanopoulos that he ask Obama about Ayers."
Right-wing radio hosts suggested "damn good" Ayers question to Stephanopoulos day before Dem debate | Research | Media Matters for America
He didn't know about Ayers!!

b. CBS's Bob Schieffer on Sunday said the reason he didn't ask Attorney General Eric Holder about the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case on last week's "Face the Nation" was because he didn't know about it.
Chatting with Howard Kurtz on CNN's "Reliable Sources," Schieffer said, "This all really became a story when the whistleblower came out and testified that he'd had to leave the Justice Department and so on. And, frankly, had I known about that, I would have asked the question."
His excuse?
"I was on vacation that week. This happened -- apparently, it got very little publicity. And, you know, I just didn't know about it" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Bob Schieffer: What Black Panther Story? 'I Was on Vacation' - Fox Nation

c. Several Chicago readers and Twitterers report that ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson told WLS-AM Chicago talk show hosts Don Wade and Roma this morning that the reason he hasn’t covered the ACORN scandal is that he didn’t know about it.

“…Charlie Gibson on as their usual Tuesday morning guest. Don asked Charlie, why, after the senate last night voted to halt funding to ACORN and after three of those video tapes of ACORN employees helping the pimp and prostitute set up shop, there was no mention of it anywhere on the network news. Charlie gave out a most uncomfortable laugh and said that that was the first he heard of it!”
ABC’s Jake Tapper reported on the Census Bureau’s decision to drop ACORN from its data collection partnerships on Friday as a result of BigGovernment.com’s video stings.
Gibson also admitted to Don and Roma that he didn’t know about the Senate vote to de-fund ACORN.
Michelle Malkin | ACORN Watch: Charlie Gibson and the ostrich media; Update: Audio added «

Maybe the difference is just plain ol' laziness.





5. One more difference: insight- found more in the conservative camp than in the Liberal.
There was actually a study by Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at the University of Virginia who, until 2009, considered himself a partisan liberal.

"In “The Righteous Mind,” Haidt seeks to enrich liberalism, and political discourse generally, with a deeper awareness of human nature.
The hardest part, Haidt finds, is getting liberals to open their minds. Anecdotally, he reports that when he talks about authority, loyalty and sanctity, many people in the audience spurn these ideas as the seeds of racism, sexism and homophobia. And in a survey of 2,000 Americans, Haidt found that self-described liberals, especially those who called themselves “very liberal,” were worse at predicting the moral judgments of moderates and conservatives than moderates and conservatives were at predicting the moral judgments of liberals.

Liberals don’t understand conservative values. And they can’t recognize this failing, because they’re so convinced of their rationality, open-mindedness and enlightenment."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/bo...anted=all&_r=0








Sadly, it is much easier in our milieu to be a Liberal than a conservative, and perhaps because there are so many more of 'em, it even takes an extra dollop of courage to be a conservative...

And....in judging others by ourselves....
.... we end up being governed by ineptitude personified.

332-206....Romney didnt even make a concession speech...so much for knowing anything.

Transcript of Mitt Romneys concession speech here:

4http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/mitt-romneys-concession-speech-transcript/story?id=17664448

So much for knowing anything!

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. Another character difference between the two political persuasions is individualism. It is one of the cornerstones of conservatism, and the 'sotto voce' of America's founding documents. We want to make our own decisions.
individualism during the Founding Fathers day was a liberal ideology, thus the idea of conservatism at that time was the old regime
The other side seems to feel that we lack the capability, and they should do this for us. That's why Liberal folks leap to ban things that they don't like, and use judicial decree to overturn voter's opinions.

So conservatives have never banned anything,hmmm, project much trying to make yourself look good when your whole OP is biased beyond reproach, or are conservatives just a cypher in govt regs?

1. "So conservatives have never banned anything..."

And, the OP says that.....where?

Oh...it doesn't?



2. "... trying to make yourself look good..."
I do look good....didn't you see my profile pic?


3. "....your whole OP is biased beyond reproach..."


First, get someone who speaks English to check your posts.

bi·ased
ˈbīəst/Submit
adjective
1.
unfairly prejudiced for or against someone or something.

re·proach
riˈprōCH/Submit
verb
1.
address (someone) in such a way as to express disapproval or disappointment.
"critics of the administration reproached the president for his failure to tackle the deficiency"
noun
1.
the expression of disapproval or disappointment.


You mean biased beyond reasonableness.....or something like that.


Well....it may be biased, but it is also true.


true
tro͞o/Submit
adjective
1.
in accordance with fact or reality.
"a true story"
synonyms: correct, accurate, right, verifiable, in accordance with the facts, what actually/really happened, well-documented, the case, so; More

rightly or strictly so called; genuine.

"he has guessed my true intentions"
said when conceding a point in argument or discussion.
"true, it faced north, but you got used to that"
2.
accurate or exact.



BTW....your 'red' ( you win in unintended humor, red)....
"individualism during the Founding Fathers day was a liberal ideology, thus the idea of conservatism at that time was the old regime"

...is inaccurate, as the original term 'classical liberal' is what we call 'conservative' today.
You see, the Communist John Dewey prevailed on the Socialists of his time to change the name to the modern usage, 'Liberal.'

Let me know if you need that proven....I can do so.

 

[norwegen]

you know what else is funny?

shes Asian and uses a blonde avi

So, are you really a dog, then?

 

[Truthmatters]

Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube

this is the founder of the heritage foundation

why are you trying to push off a study on voting by a site with this history?

 

[Billy000]

Conservatives believe a person is responsible for themselves and their family.

Liberals believe the community is responsible for everyone thus they can tell you what to do and they can take what they want from you for the "collective."

Don't you see the error in thinking in such extremes? Its such simple minded reasoning. It keeps you from understanding political philosophy in depth.

 

[Truthmatters]

why did the scotus say to the courts ......keep punishing the republican party for cheating in elections

 

[PoliticalChic]

Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube

this is the founder of the heritage foundation

Psssttt.....rumor has it that its the conservatives who are happy you're back....the Liberals are embarrassed.

Why would that be?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives believe a person is responsible for themselves and their family.

Liberals believe the community is responsible for everyone thus they can tell you what to do and they can take what they want from you for the "collective."

Don't you see the error in thinking in such extremes? Its such simple minded reasoning. It keeps you from understanding political philosophy in depth.

" Its such simple minded reasoning."


This....from YOU?????


That is too funny for words.

 

[Truthmatters]

Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube

this is the founder of the heritage foundation

Psssttt.....rumor has it that its the conservatives who are happy you're back....the Liberals are embarrassed.

Why would that be?

what makes you qualified to speak for anyone but your self?

Slander is against your claimed religion isn't it?

 

[Truthmatters]

now why did the scotus tell the courts to keep punishing the republican party for cheating people out of their votes to steal power from the people?

 

[TemplarKormac]

embracing cheating the American people out of their vote is not bravery its being a traitor

Can you please go back where you came from?

 

[Truthmatters]

At Supreme Court, no reprieve for GOP in voting rights consent decree - CSMonitor.com



At Supreme Court, no reprieve for GOP in voting rights consent decree


US Supreme Court on Monday turned aside a petition from the Republican National Committee to lift a 30-year-old consent decree. The decree requires the RNC to refrain from tactics that could suppress voting rights.

By Warren Richey, Staff writer / January 14, 2013










th right leaning scotus agreed the republican party needs to be punished

why didn't they not save your party if they are not GUILTY?????

 

[Truthmatters]

not one of you can comment on those court documented facts that go right up to a scout decision just last year?

 

[Billy000]

Conservatives believe a person is responsible for themselves and their family.

Liberals believe the community is responsible for everyone thus they can tell you what to do and they can take what they want from you for the "collective."

Don't you see the error in thinking in such extremes? Its such simple minded reasoning. It keeps you from understanding political philosophy in depth.

" Its such simple minded reasoning."


This....from YOU?????


That is too funny for words.

Well it is quite evident you lack an understanding of fundamental definitions so you really dont have room to talk.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Don't you see the error in thinking in such extremes? Its such simple minded reasoning. It keeps you from understanding political philosophy in depth.

" Its such simple minded reasoning."


This....from YOU?????


That is too funny for words.

Well it is quite evident you lack an understanding of fundamental definitions so you really dont have room to talk.

Oh...yeah, Billy000IQ?????


That's what you say!


I just so happen to have a 'talking room' and even a 'sitting room' built into my mansion!

So there.