Posted on 05/08/2008 7:00:29 AM PDT by Ouderkirk
Well, to be fair, it's easier on us. With them, there's a lot less TO understand.
Actually, you may notice I directly contradicted myself in post 28.
Not at all: it's the appropriate apportionment of responsibility.
The way liberals see it,though, is that other people's lives are thier responsibility, is psychological codependency. They are the dysfunctional ones.
Conservatives believe in FREEDOM.
With freedom comes responsibilities and consequences.
Conservatives understand that one is free to make good or bad life choices. That with bad choices come the negative consequences.
Liberals believe that all choices are equivalent and should yield positive outcomes.
Their unhappiness grows out of their inability to reconcile negative consequences from bad choices, since all choices should yield a positive outcome.
My B.S. detector just went off the charts.
Yup.
As a general rule, I've stopped arguing with Liberals. Their willful ignorance of the way things work just makes my head hurt. I had a Lib recently tell me...in all seriousness...that the cold winter we had was a result of global warming. I played dumb and said "So, if things get warmer, it's Global Warming, and if they get colder, it's Global Warming?"
Her answer? "Yes. You're not one of those crazy Global Warming Deniers, are you?" No thought, no nothing. Just parroting the party lie.
How do you argue with people who are unwilling or unable to think for themselves?
They make many wrong assumptions about conservatives:
That we’re all greedy (rich)
That we all hate gays
That we all hate minorities
That WE are the elites (they can’t possibly be because they don’t come from money)
“party lie” = “party line”. But I think I might like my first Freudian Slip, better.
So have I. "Willful ignorance" is right -- they confuse facts with wishful thinking.
A couple of months or so ago, the adult (at least chronologically) daughter of one of my fellow synagogue members started screeching at me when I mentioned (in an otherwise polite group discussion about politics) that Clinton is the candidate for POTUS that I like the least. This woman who never met me before literally got in my face and demanded to know if I "have something against strong women." You don't want to know how she reacted when I calmly and factually pointed out why I don't think Clinton is a strong woman at all.
That statement is believable. How could a liberal possibly be happier than a conservative? How could anyone shouldering the constant and unrelenting gloom and doom burden each day be happy? How could anyone spend each day seeking the womb to tomb care they feel they so richly deserve be happy? I’m surprised they are even able to sleep at night.
Also, if I recall correctly, in cases of public giving in a crisis, a recent study showed the highest per capita amount donated came from RED states, most notably the Deep South.
I suppose that if ambition and success make me a greedy elitist, then I'm guilty. :-)
Truly, the only hardcore racists that I've met have all been Democrats. My wife's Aunt and Uncle (committed Dems, both of them) gave me the advice when my wife and I were buying a house to stay away from neighborhoods with lots of (quote) "Niggers. Because they're shiftless and will steal you blind.".
I live in a mixed neighborhood, and the only problem that I've had with anyone is with the 60s-remnant hippies that live next door to me, along with their six #$@%#%^&%^$ dogs that bark all the $#%%#$^ time.
My wife's friends (all Dems...all of them) sat up one evening at oue beach house not too long ago catagorizing all of the people that they hung out with by race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. They wanted to be sure that they had a good mix, and that they should "collect" (their quote, not mine) other races, genders, etc that "they didn't have yet".
All along I've been picking my friends based on common interests and whether or not I liked them....and to hear that I've had it wrong all this time.
I'm sure that there are Republican Racists out there, I just haven't met any of them yet.
This has been the party line since Hofstadter’s work in the 1950s.
Sounds like many of the Democrats in my family. Remember, however, that many of these folks will become "McCain Democrats" simply on the racial issue alone.
Yep. I'm looking forward to watching a number of my in-laws bend over backwards looking for reasons NOT to vote for Obama.
Or, what I figure is less provable but more likely...that they'll keep their mouths shut, their wallets buttoned up, and just vote for McCain in the general election.
Liberals ate unhappy because they are irrational. The source and means of knowledge for them is empathy which is equivalent to emotionalism rather than reason.
Conservatives do care about many things, such as the morals of their children, the rights of the unborn, what is taught in our schools, the victims of crimes, the effects on our society of sex, drugs, and violence, and the protection of our rights against foreign forces who want to harm us.
Proof of the thesis is all the private charity that is indulged in by conservatives. If they actually cared about other people they would tax away all peoples’s assets and income to redistribute to everyone in a fair allocation as determined by properly educated experts.
“If everyone followed these rules, there’d be a lot less “needy” in the first place.”
But not everyone follows those rules. Do they get what is coming to them?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you in principles. It is just that in practical terms, what you say is cold hearted.
Cold hearted? If you look at it from a liberal point of view, perhaps.
The problem we’re seeing today is that there is no incentive pressure to follow those rules.
Heck, if you don’t work and take care of yourself, you just go down to the welfare office and get a check.
So, considering this, do you think we’ll have MORE or LESS “needy” if there are no consequences for behaving in a way that makes you “needy”?
The needy should be taken care of in exactly the manner that I described, VOLUNTARILY by those who have made the decisions to be secure. And there SHOULD be stigma involved in having to accept this charity.
As I stated, if there are no consequences for bad decisions, there will be more of those bad decisions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.