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

[bripat9643]

Incorrect, I have no belief I would not abandon in a moment if presented with credible information to the contrary. Can you say that? Hardly, the conservative's faith based economics and American Exceptionalism dogma is enough by itself to make this OP a tasty example of projection.

Let's try you out: Do you think liberals care more about minorities and the poor than conservatives?

Yes, by definition.

ROFL! Yeah, you don't believe in dogma!

 

[bripat9643]

Really? Because the conservatives want to ban gay marriage, and the liberals want it approved.

Self righteous people tell others who don't conform to their world view that they're "wrong" and will be damned for eternity.

Liberals don't. They believe in a live and let live philosophy.

Really? What if I own a restaurant and I don't want to serve blacks?

 

[Unkotare]

Liberals don't. They believe in a live and let live philosophy.

LOL! Bullshit they do.

 

[Unkotare]

So how many of you conservatives in this thread hold opinions that you don't think are the right ones?

That question misses the point. Read the OP again.

 

[Unkotare]

The New Phrenology | The Weekly Standard


Liberals don't believe in differences of opinions or varying approaches to problems. They must be absolutely certain that they are absolutely right or their world view crumbles. This is why they say stupid shit like, "conservatives are against abortion, but they hate babies!" because to their 'minds' only an embrace of liberal views and policies can possibly coincide with caring for people. They also say shit like, "show me what Republican policies have ever done anything for X or Y minorities!" as if the liberal assumption that people must only be considered as members of an aggrieved group and not as individuals is a given, and that only liberal policies could possibly be in the best interests of anyone (this is where the "voting against your own interests" canard comes in). A liberal never loses an election because the people just tended to agree with the ideas of the other side. It's always a "failure to make the people understand our positions." Every election a liberal loses was rigged, corrupt, stolen, etc. Every election a liberal wins is an example of democracy in action. They can't help but think this way, and wouldn't change if they could. They are just right, smart, and virtuous in all things - studies show!

That's a good one.

Some idiot making broad brush generalities about liberals, accusing them of making broadbrush generalities about conservatives.

Interestingly, it took about two minutes for some liberals to show up here and prove exactly, almost to the word, what I said in the OP.

 

[Unkotare]

No, being MORE self-righteous than leftists would be impossible under the laws of physics as we currently understand them.

Really? Because the conservatives want to ban gay marriage, and the liberals want it approved.

Self righteous people tell others who don't conform to their world view that they're "wrong" and will be damned for eternity.

Liberals don't. They believe in a live and let live philosophy.

They also want to imprison women and doctors for detaching a part of the female body from itself.

Are you arguing in favor of female circumcision? You sick bastard.

 

[BlindBoo]

Yep when ever I want to find out how I feel as a liberal I always rely on conservatives to tell me.

 

[Papageorgio]

So how many of you conservatives in this thread hold opinions that you don't think are the right ones?

I'm never sure about opinions, my opinions have changed and developed over the years as I learn more. I never stop growing, maturing and developing, that is why I'll listen and post and debate. Principles are another issue, but I do detest the absolutes that the left seems to like to fall into.
If you are not for public collective bargaining, the left tells us we are against all unions. If you are for smaller government, the left claims you are against all government, if you are not for public funded birth control, you hate women and so on, it is not logical, it is used to invoke emotion instead of reason. That is par for the liberal course.

 

[Papageorgio]

Republicans are more self-righteous.

No, being MORE self-righteous than leftists would be impossible under the laws of physics as we currently understand them.

Really? Because the conservatives want to ban gay marriage, and the liberals want it approved.

Self righteous people tell others who don't conform to their world view that they're "wrong" and will be damned for eternity.

Liberals don't. They believe in a live and let live philosophy.

Liberals believe that as long as you agree with them, that is fine, if you disagree with them, then you are ignorant and a second class citizen. I also find it interesting that those on the leftist elite believe they do not need to live what they preach.

 

[bobcollum]

How this thread remains in this section is a mystery to me.

It's a flame at best and more than likely belongs in the rubber room, because it's pure partisan hackery.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

He believed he 'was just right' about 'required tithing.'

LOL

Please name a Pew study in the link you gave me which claims liberals are less charitable than conservatives.

When you get your GED, you can read it for yourself!

Please name a Pew study in the link you gave me which claims liberals are less charitable than conservatives.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Please name a Pew study in the link you gave me which claims liberals are less charitable than conservatives.

When you get your GED, you can read it for yourself!

Please name a Pew study in the link you gave me which claims liberals are less charitable than conservatives.

They can't. Its something they pulled outta their asses, because I don't really know of any charity that asks what your political affiliation is.

And...............of course conservatives are going to lie about how much they give to charity, they feel guilty for not following what Jesus taught.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, being MORE self-righteous than leftists would be impossible under the laws of physics as we currently understand them.

Really? Because the conservatives want to ban gay marriage, and the liberals want it approved.

Self righteous people tell others who don't conform to their world view that they're "wrong" and will be damned for eternity.

Liberals don't. They believe in a live and let live philosophy.

They also want to imprison women and doctors for detaching a part of the female body from itself.

Personally, I just want to imprison dipshits like you whose biological knowledge is a century out-of-date for being criminally ignorant.

"A part of the female body from itself." Seriously, PoohPoo. How many times DID you have to blow your high school biology teacher to get him to pass you? It always amuses me to see a leftist "champion of women's rights" who's so piss-stupid she's actually a living argument for the idea that women are too stupid to be allowed to vote. The irony is too much.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Except that there is no evidence of that actually being true.

Sure there is proof it's true:

NYT: Bleeding Heart Tightwads

This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.

Other research has reached similar conclusions. The “generosity index” from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html

Is there really only ONE study that shows this? everyone one of you nutbags makes this claim, it ALWAYS goes back to a single study but A CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK PRESIDENT named Arthur C Brooks. Do you not desire any credibility whatsoever?

The study wasn't "but" Arthur Brooks (speaking of credibility, don't you think speaking English would help YOURS?). Arthur Brooks wrote a BOOK on the subject, referencing many different studies and sources of data. I believe the study you're currently talking about - although God knows, it's hard to tell WHAT you're talking about at any given moment - was the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, which is currently done by the Roper Center, and was originated by Harvard.

But let's see: how much does it support the OP that you automatically dismiss any evidence that contradicts you as "just some conservative at some conservative think tank" and "not credible"? Hmmm.

While we're on the subject, the other sources of data used in his book - as listed in the Appendix - are the Population Panel of Income Dynamics, the General Social Survey, the International Social Survey Program, The Arts and Religion Survey, the Giving USA Foundation, the Maxwell Poll, the American National Election Study, the Giving and Volunteering in the United States survey, and the America Gives survey.

Feel free to find fault with any of them you like, but don't think picking at just one is going to allow you to pretend you've discredited everything.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Is there really only ONE study that shows this?

This was an extremely exhaustive study, by the way.

How would you know?

You cannot refute the results.

Nor the fact that Liberals such as yourself spend your votes on candidates that promise you the most free gubmint stuff.

I don't dispute the fact that conservative think tank President Arthur C Brooks got to define what counted as "charity" and then found that conservatives gave more often to the things he has defined as "charity" - no. I just don't see the value in the finding. Wow - conservatives like to give more to conservative causes than liberals do. Earth shattering! Hey lets publish a book about that and sell it to a bunch of sucker morons who think their shit don't stink!

"I never read the book, I don't know what studies were used or who did them or what the criteria were, but it disagrees with my worldview, so IT'S A LIE! It's all biased bullshit, and THIS must have been what it was based on because that's what I want to believe, and since I say it was based on that, it's invalidated because of the basis I've decided it had!"

Yeah, you're not a walking, talking, blithering billboard for the OP.

 

[Billo_Really]

Interestingly, it took about two minutes for some liberals to show up here and prove exactly, almost to the word, what I said in the OP.

Care to explain how the things liberals have said in this thread show:

Liberals don't believe in differences of opinions
They must be absolutely certain that they are absolutely right
Every election a liberal loses was rigged, corrupt, stolen, etc.
​

Your OP does a lot of broadstroking about liberals. I'm a liberal and I've never said anything like:

conservatives are against abortion, but they hate babies
show me what Republican policies have ever done anything
only liberal policies could possibly be in the best interests of anyone​

And this statement...

They can't help but think this way, and wouldn't change if they could.​

...shows you're doing the exact thing you accuse liberals of doing. I know for me, I've changed my opinion (or position) many times. If information is discovered that makes me re-think a particular issue, I'll change my position. As an example, I voted for Obama. His actions in office have convinced me not to vote for him again.

If you can't bring a good enough argument to the table, don't blame liberals for thinking their always right. Maybe some do, I don't. If you can't prove I'm wrong, it's not because I refuse to hear your argument.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

This was an extremely exhaustive study, by the way.

How would you know?

You cannot refute the results.

Nor the fact that Liberals such as yourself spend your votes on candidates that promise you the most free gubmint stuff.

I don't dispute the fact that conservative think tank President Arthur C Brooks got to define what counted as "charity" and then found that conservatives gave more often to the things he has defined as "charity" - no. I just don't see the value in the finding. Wow - conservatives like to give more to conservative causes than liberals do. Earth shattering! Hey lets publish a book about that and sell it to a bunch of sucker morons who think their shit don't stink!

"I never read the book, I don't know what studies were used or who did them or what the criteria were, but it disagrees with my worldview, so IT'S A LIE! It's all biased bullshit, and THIS must have been what it was based on because that's what I want to believe, and since I say it was based on that, it's invalidated because of the basis I've decided it had!"

Yeah, you're not a walking, talking, blithering billboard for the OP.

How many books have you read that were written by the Presidents of left wing think tanks? My guess is NONE, so shut the **** up hypocrite.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Sure there is proof it's true:

NYT: Bleeding Heart Tightwads



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html

Is there really only ONE study that shows this? everyone one of you nutbags makes this claim, it ALWAYS goes back to a single study but A CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK PRESIDENT named Arthur C Brooks. Do you not desire any credibility whatsoever?

The study wasn't "but" Arthur Brooks (speaking of credibility, don't you think speaking English would help YOURS?). Arthur Brooks wrote a BOOK on the subject, referencing many different studies and sources of data. I believe the study you're currently talking about - although God knows, it's hard to tell WHAT you're talking about at any given moment - was the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, which is currently done by the Roper Center, and was originated by Harvard.

But let's see: how much does it support the OP that you automatically dismiss any evidence that contradicts you as "just some conservative at some conservative think tank" and "not credible"? Hmmm.

While we're on the subject, the other sources of data used in his book - as listed in the Appendix - are the Population Panel of Income Dynamics, the General Social Survey, the International Social Survey Program, The Arts and Religion Survey, the Giving USA Foundation, the Maxwell Poll, the American National Election Study, the Giving and Volunteering in the United States survey, and the America Gives survey.

Feel free to find fault with any of them you like, but don't think picking at just one is going to allow you to pretend you've discredited everything.

And what definition did he use for what counted as a charitable contribution?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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

No.

Unlike conservatives liberals don’t adhere blindly to sanctioned political doctrine and dogma, liberals are more pragmatic and tend to base their opinions on facts and objective evidence, rather than dogma. Conservatives buy into the myth of ‘voter fraud,’ for example, where there is no evidence such fraud has changed the outcome of any election. Or the unsubstantiated nonsense in this thread about liberals being ‘less charitable.’

 

[francoHFW]

So what are pub POLICIES on the poor, and how do the dupes explain the poor's plight?

The rest is BS. Explained I believe by tithing.

Dems I believe wish gov't to assist the victim's of savage capitalism, and provide training and education for better work, not turning them into charity cases. Charity overhead is often ridiculous, it dries up when needed.

Pubs are also responsible for crummy jobs, health care, college costs, etc etc. A myriad of ways to pander to the rich and ruin the nonrich, and a huge dishonest propaganda machine to mislead and distract.