# Do Conservatives lack Freewill



## midcan5

Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society? 

See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman


----------



## Stephanie

lol, that's what a lot of people ask about you liberals/lefties

you all seem to march in lockstep with the party and regurgitate everything they say...


----------



## CrusaderFrank

The last Democrat to try to go against the Party was Joe Lieberman and he went from VP Candidate to Disappeared


----------



## Trajan

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



genes? oh, so its in the dna, right, got it

freewill? so pelosi marching just about every blue dog over a cliff certainly was freewill alright....jesus, do you read what you post?


----------



## Stephanie

CrusaderFrank said:


> The last Democrat to try to go against the Party was Joe Lieberman and he went from VP Candidate to Disappeared



yep, they get rid of anyone who doesn't toe the line...

they are like slave masters and their base are their SLAVES...that is sad


----------



## Trajan

CrusaderFrank said:


> The last Democrat to try to go against the Party was Joe Lieberman and he went from VP Candidate to Disappeared



no no, difference of opinion that doesn't reflect the party line isn't freewill, its in Joes genes....


----------



## Metzor

The problem is that liberals are arrogant and stupid enough to believe that everything they think is pure gold. And everyone that disagrees with them lacks freewill, or is a racist.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



That would be consistent with the propensity of most conservatives to adhere blindly to partisan doctrine and dogma, particularly when the facts prove that conservative doctrine and dogma are indeed wrong.


----------



## Stephanie

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be consistent with the propensity of most conservatives to adhere blindly to partisan doctrine and dogma, particularly when the facts prove that conservative doctrine and dogma are indeed wrong.
Click to expand...


lol, coming from one of the most partisan people for the Democrats...what a hoot


----------



## CrusaderFrank

I love USMB because its puts to rest the myth of Liberal intellectual superiority


----------



## Trajan

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be consistent with the propensity of most conservatives to adhere blindly to partisan doctrine and dogma, particularly when the facts prove that conservative doctrine and dogma are indeed wrong.
Click to expand...


right, like, oh the 40 hour work week taking a dive?  or obama directing the OPM to change the meaning of "not withstanding"  so they can have their cake and eat it to to avoid the harshest terms of obamacare for Congress and their staffers? 

 Or  support for a  public education system that spends as much  as an elite school costs per student,  BUT then submarines funds for vouchers for minority students for the sake of...what again?  you mean like that?


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?


ANYONE who doesn't agree with the progressive agenda is a threat to the progressive agenda.

Your objection is not that we can't think for ourselves.  _It's that we don't think exactly like you._


----------



## daveman

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That would be consistent with the propensity of most conservatives to adhere blindly to partisan doctrine and dogma, particularly when *the facts* prove that conservative doctrine and dogma are indeed wrong.


You misspelled "progressive doctrine and dogma".


----------



## midcan5

My mention of the Hirschman's book was for historical reasons, Hirschman does criticize contemporary liberals for the same repetitive sloganism and solutions. But conservatives have practiced ostrich thinking for three hundred years. The lack of freewill exhibited by conservatives is evident in our congress and especially in their media channels. My point is on another level than even the historical, it is more about their culture. Today when you listen to any conservative talking head or representative, they all say the same things. The same things. How is that possible if they are conscious, freedom loving individuals, it's not possible. It would only be possible if some receiver were implanted in their head. That hopefully is not the case so one must look to their culture. Sometimes though labels fit poorly, picking and choosing a single exception as some noted above, does not prove much. I have posted several broad satiric comments on the right, it is only the right's puppet like behavior that allows that to be possible. My signature contains two. Conservatives can deny reality but their constant repeating of the same slogans, the same empty ideas, shows clearly no freewill is present. Remember the ten hands rising, if you doubt that.


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> My mention of the Hirschman's book was for historical reasons, Hirschman does criticize contemporary liberals for the same repetitive sloganism and solutions. But conservatives have practiced ostrich thinking for three hundred years. The lack of freewill exhibited by conservatives is evident in our congress and especially in their media channels. My point is on another level than even the historical, it is more about their culture. Today when you listen to any conservative talking head or representative, they all say the same things. The same things. How is that possible if they are conscious, freedom loving individuals, it's not possible. It would only be possible if some receiver were implanted in their head. That hopefully is not the case so one must look to their culture. Sometimes though labels fit poorly, picking and choosing a single exception as some noted above, does not prove much. I have posted several broad satiric comments on the right, it is only the right's puppet like behavior that allows that to be possible. My signature contains two. Conservatives can deny reality but their constant repeating of the same slogans, the same empty ideas, shows clearly no freewill is present. Remember the ten hands rising, if you doubt that.


What in the world ever convinced you you're an intelligent person?


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



This is kind of a funny post.  You criticize conservatives for not being open to new ideas because they already feel they have the right answers and are opposed to change.  Essentially, your criticism is that assuming other ideas are wrong because you've already got the correct ones is intellectually wrong.

In doing so, however, you're making the unspoken assumption that the broad base of ideas that opposes yours is clearly wrong, so people who adhere to those ideas must have something wrong with them.  Essentially, after criticizing conservatives for thinking they've got the right ideas and dismissing those ideas that disagree, you've dismissed their entire philosophical camp for disagreeing with your obviously superior ideas.

Unless, of course, you're honestly under the impression that what "conservatives" all want is for everything to freeze as it is.  In that case you're not a hypocrite, just really dishonest or really unobservant.

Am I the only guy that finds these kinds of posts fuckin hilarious?  God damn partisans.


----------



## midcan5

Whenever conservative republicans mention freedom think of those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England 



daveman said:


> What in the world ever convinced you you're an intelligent person?



Convinced? Did I say that? Maybe my ideas are really dumb, your task is to prove that. 



Not2BSubjugated said:


> This is kind of a funny post.  You criticize conservatives for not being open to new ideas because they already feel they have the right answers and are opposed to change.  Essentially, your criticism is that assuming other ideas are wrong because you've already got the correct ones is intellectually wrong.....
> 
> Am I the only guy that finds these kinds of posts fuckin hilarious?  God damn partisans.



Great post, I like that you reacted to it, laughter is always a good thing.  But that is the same partisan answer liberals / progressives / social democrats / economic humanists / radical conservatives, would get to ideas that challenge your idea of the status quo. I assume you are a conservative, a full blooded American conservative, one of those freedom loving Americans. 




> "The focus here is on ignorance or doubt or uncertainty as something that is made, maintained, and manipulated by means of certain arts and sciences, The idea is one that easily lends itself to paranoia: namely, that certain people don't want you to know certain things, or will actively work to organize doubt or uncertainty or misinformation to help maintain (your) ignorance. They know, and may or may not want you to know they know, but you are not to be privy to the secret. This is an idea insufficiently explored by philosophers, that ignorance should not be viewed as a simple omission or gap, but rather as an active production. Ignorance can be an actively engineered part of a deliberate plan. I'll begin with trade secrets, moving from there in the next three sections to tobacco agnotology, military secrecy, and the example of ignorance making (or maintenance) as moral resistance." Robert N. Proctor 'Agnotology'


----------



## Stephanie

isn't it wonderful, more hate for people from the left...

the left believe they are the most enlightened people to walk the earth


----------



## midcan5

Stephanie said:


> isn't it wonderful, more hate for people from the left...
> 
> the left believe they are the most enlightened people to walk the earth



'Hate?' I hear that word used often by conservatives, do you ever wonder why? 

"So consider: elderly people of limited means in the United States who are dependent on Medicare for their basic well-beingthere are tens of millions of themare rather clearly vulnerable people. Why, then, is it not equally problematic when a powerful congressman, Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, advocates effectively eliminating the program that benefits these vulnerable people, indeed, keeps them alive? Hatred, after all, is not the issue as Waldron says, and no one, I assume, thinks Rep. Ryan hates the elderly or the poor. He may simply be stupid, or in thrall to an ideology, or defective in empathetic capacity, or beholden to special interests; whatever the explanation, it is clear that his proposals, if enacted, would eventually result in elderly people in need being unable to afford essential healthcare."  Brian Leiter review of 'The Harm in Hate Speech' by Jeremy Waldron, Waldron on the Regulation of Hate Speech by Brian Leiter :: SSRN


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Whenever conservative republicans mention freedom think of those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What in the world ever convinced you you're an intelligent person?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Convinced? Did I say that? Maybe my ideas are really dumb, your task is to prove that.
> 
> 
> 
> Not2BSubjugated said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is kind of a funny post.  You criticize conservatives for not being open to new ideas because they already feel they have the right answers and are opposed to change.  Essentially, your criticism is that assuming other ideas are wrong because you've already got the correct ones is intellectually wrong.....
> 
> Am I the only guy that finds these kinds of posts fuckin hilarious?  God damn partisans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Great post, I like that you reacted to it, laughter is always a good thing.  But that is the same partisan answer liberals / progressives / social democrats / economic humanists / radical conservatives, would get to ideas that challenge your idea of the status quo. I assume you are a conservative, a full blooded American conservative, one of those freedom loving Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The focus here is on ignorance or doubt or uncertainty as something that is made, maintained, and manipulated by means of certain arts and sciences, The idea is one that easily lends itself to paranoia: namely, that certain people don't want you to know certain things, or will actively work to organize doubt or uncertainty or misinformation to help maintain (your) ignorance. They know, and may or may not want you to know they know, but you are not to be privy to the secret. This is an idea insufficiently explored by philosophers, that ignorance should not be viewed as a simple omission or gap, but rather as an active production. Ignorance can be an actively engineered part of a deliberate plan. I'll begin with trade secrets, moving from there in the next three sections to tobacco agnotology, military secrecy, and the example of ignorance making (or maintenance) as moral resistance." Robert N. Proctor 'Agnotology'
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Not by the standards that are typically used to describe conservatives, no.  I'd call myself an agnostic libertarian.

As such, no, that's not the same kind of answer that someone would get for challenging my ideas of the status quo.  I wouldn't assume they were stupid or mentally defective for not agreeing with my philosophy.  I would weigh their ideas out against my own knowledge, moral/philosophical outlook, and logical ability and decide whether or not I feel those ideas hold water.  My response would either be, "thanks, I never looked at it that way," or, more often, "I disagree because. . . " followed by a list of particular reasons why I believe their idea was incorrect or at least philosophically disagreeable to my outlook.

I don't like when people resort to excuses to shut down arguments without actually addressing the argument, and I'm not nearly hypocritical enough to do that myself.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> 
> isn't it wonderful, more hate for people from the left...
> 
> the left believe they are the most enlightened people to walk the earth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Hate?' I hear that word used often by conservatives, do you ever wonder why?
> 
> "So consider: elderly people of limited means in the United States who are dependent on Medicare for their basic well-beingthere are tens of millions of themare rather clearly vulnerable people. Why, then, is it not equally problematic when a powerful congressman, Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, advocates effectively eliminating the program that benefits these vulnerable people, indeed, keeps them alive? Hatred, after all, is not the issue as Waldron says, and no one, I assume, thinks Rep. Ryan hates the elderly or the poor. He may simply be stupid, or in thrall to an ideology, or defective in empathetic capacity, or beholden to special interests; whatever the explanation, it is clear that his proposals, if enacted, would eventually result in elderly people in need being unable to afford essential healthcare."  Brian Leiter review of 'The Harm in Hate Speech' by Jeremy Waldron, Waldron on the Regulation of Hate Speech by Brian Leiter :: SSRN
Click to expand...


This quote you've got here is a perfect example of not bothering to address an argument, and in stead opting to assume that the messenger of said argument is somehow defective and therefore the argument isn't worthy of consideration.  This, while a common argument technique, is not actually a logical argument.

For the sake of this argument, we'll take everything at face value as he's written it.  Medicare protects vulnerable people and Paul Ryan wants to eliminate the program.  Rather than take an honest look at the reasons Ryan has given for wanting to do so, he tosses out a list of potential defects, "Maybe he's stupid, in thrall to an ideology (which, though the in thrall bit makes it sound hypnotic and mindless, can be said about anyone who wants anything done politically.  Ultimately anything you could want on a societal scale is based on your values and your values are based on your ideology, whatever that might be.  The idea that people should pay into Medicare to keep other people alive is also based on ideology  ), or defective in empathetic capacity, or beholden to special interests. . . "

None of those potential reasons have anything to do with Ryan's actual argument.  They're simply convenient excuses to disregard the argument completely.  On top of that, they carry that ridiculously arrogant assumption that anyone who would disagree with the moral value that Medicare must be perpetuated is either stupid, emotionally broken, or paid off.

Does this sound familiar?

If liberals assume that every idea that challenges their most closely held morals must be rooted in stupidity, sociopathy, or blatant dishonesty, it shows an unwillingness to adapt or change.  Do liberals lack free will?

Funny, given your OP, that you would post this nonsense.


----------



## Zoom-boing

Let me get this straight ... the party of (supposed) diversity, tolerance, choice believes that those who do not believe exactly as they do are mentally defective.  

<blink, blink>

Leftism at its finest!


----------



## dblack

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



Well, you're equivocating on the term 'conservative'. The points you make apply a conservative personality trait, not necessarily the political leaning. My s.o. is a traditional Democrat and far more personally conservative than I am, even though I'm often labeled 'far right' politically (often labeled radical left-wing too, so go figure).

To answer you question, yeah, conservatives can be a threat to open, democratic society. Just don't try to conflate those kinds of 'conservatives' with the various political ideologies.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

dblack said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you're equivocating on the term 'conservative'. The points you make apply a conservative personality trait, not necessarily the political leaning. My s.o. is a traditional Democrat and far more personally conservative than I am, even though I'm often labeled 'far right' politically (often labeled radical left-wing too, so go figure).
> 
> To answer you question, yeah, conservatives can be a threat to open, democratic society. Just don't try to conflate those kinds of 'conservatives' with the various political ideologies.
Click to expand...


Beautifully put.


----------



## editec

Does an ameoba have free will just because it moves away from that which it does not like and toward that which it does like?

Over the years I have grown increasingly dubious of the entire concept of "free will".

Personally I think we confuse the fact that we* can* make choices in the world with the idea that we are *free* to choose.

Stop and think about it....if we* have to *choose that means that we are not entirely free  and our vaulted WILL does not negate the fact that the world IMPOSES itself upon us.

And not to make too much about the issue but our BRAINS are no less subject to the slings and arrows of outragous fortune than we are.

How much freewill do you suppose it takes to maintain a long term depressive state?

Free will?

I don't believe it exists..randomness exists, and that feel a lot like free will when you're the one riding that event.


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Whenever conservative republicans mention freedom think of those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What in the world ever convinced you you're an intelligent person?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Convinced? Did I say that? Maybe my ideas are really dumb, your task is to prove that.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't accept such proof.


----------



## Trajan

midcan5 said:


> My mention of the Hirschman's book was for historical reasons, Hirschman does criticize contemporary liberals for the same repetitive sloganism and solutions. But conservatives have practiced ostrich thinking for three hundred years. The lack of freewill exhibited by conservatives is evident in our congress and especially in their media channels. My point is on another level than even the historical, it is more about their culture. Today when you listen to any conservative talking head or representative, they all say the same things. The same things. How is that possible if they are conscious, freedom loving individuals, it's not possible. It would only be possible if some receiver were implanted in their head. That hopefully is not the case so one must look to their culture. Sometimes though labels fit poorly, picking and choosing a single exception as some noted above, does not prove much. I have posted several broad satiric comments on the right, it is only the right's puppet like behavior that allows that to be possible. My signature contains two. Conservatives can deny reality but their constant repeating of the same slogans, the same empty ideas, shows clearly no freewill is present. Remember the ten hands rising, if you doubt that.




"The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. 

The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself. "

and there ya go, compliments of DPM.


----------



## midcan5

Not2BSubjugated, Agnostic libertarian? So you're unsure libertarianism exists? That's kinda funny. You do a wonderful job of assigning great insight and analysis to your potential answer should you answer. Is that another funny? 

What argument would you be addressing when someone's calls this hate? You need to put on your thinking cap. Conservatives use the word hate often, is there a need to say more? You should ask them why. Could it be... nah...

Brian Leiter's list is valid without discussing what other reason Ryan may have for screwing needy people. If you think there is a valid reason for hurting people in need [given the resources of this nation] go for it. Since you agree with Ryan and possess great explanatory skill, you're on. But I'd like you to explain that in a real world situation to the people too. I know that's asking too much. You're a lot of fun to read. See even liberals laugh. 


Dblack, I meant it as political. The term loses meaning outside politics for all of us are a blend in varying degrees. You should know by now I exaggerate, exaggeration often gets us to a place normal reason misses. But you agree, I think. lol


Daveman, Proof is still in your corner. Does it matter to you what I think. Prove it to others. 


Trajan,  who is dpm?  You're on the right track but you forget culture is full of politics. You cannot hide from politics unless you move to an isolated island cave by yourself. 'Custom' guides us, we could say culture, you must admit blacks, gays, and women are treated differently today - somethings do change, hard as it is. It is politics that pushes forward or backward till change seems like custom or if you prefer culture. Politics isn't simply government, it is people acting in that vague commons too. If you think culture is some fixed standard you need to define it - but that way lay landmines.


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Daveman, Proof is still in your corner. Does it matter to you what I think. Prove it to others.



I've got nothing to prove.  YOU made an assertion -- YOU back it up.  I'm not doing your homework for you, boy.


----------



## hortysir

This on the heels of mandating an entire country do something that most don't feel they should have to do........





ok


----------



## daveman

hortysir said:


> This on the heels of mandating an entire country do something that most don't feel they should have to do........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ok


When fascism comes to America, it will be carrying a protest sign and screeching, "It's for the CHILDREN!!"


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Not2BSubjugated, Agnostic libertarian? So you're unsure libertarianism exists? That's kinda funny. You do a wonderful job of assigning great insight and analysis to your potential answer should you answer. Is that another funny?
> 
> What argument would you be addressing when someone's calls this hate? You need to put on your thinking cap. Conservatives use the word hate often, is there a need to say more? You should ask them why. Could it be... nah...
> 
> Brian Leiter's list is valid without discussing what other reason Ryan may have for screwing needy people. If you think there is a valid reason for hurting people in need [given the resources of this nation] go for it. Since you agree with Ryan and possess great explanatory skill, you're on. But I'd like you to explain that in a real world situation to the people too. I know that's asking too much. You're a lot of fun to read. See even liberals laugh.
> 
> 
> Dblack, I meant it as political. The term loses meaning outside politics for all of us are a blend in varying degrees. You should know by now I exaggerate, exaggeration often gets us to a place normal reason misses. But you agree, I think. lol
> 
> 
> Daveman, Proof is still in your corner. Does it matter to you what I think. Prove it to others.
> 
> 
> Trajan,  who is dpm?  You're on the right track but you forget culture is full of politics. You cannot hide from politics unless you move to an isolated island cave by yourself. 'Custom' guides us, we could say culture, you must admit blacks, gays, and women are treated differently today - somethings do change, hard as it is. It is politics that pushes forward or backward till change seems like custom or if you prefer culture. Politics isn't simply government, it is people acting in that vague commons too. If you think culture is some fixed standard you need to define it - but that way lay landmines.



In all fairness, everyone uses the word hate often.  Liberals are no less full of hate and vitriol than conservatives in my experience, though they're often portrayed that way because their politics is partially centered around trying to eliminate hate as it relates to racial and sexual minorities.  There is, believe it or not, a difference between subscribing to the politics of equality and not being hateful.

And that point segues neatly into addressing that there are, indeed, reasons one might want to end medicare that aren't centered around stupidity, hate, or mental defects.  I can't speak directly for Paul Ryan, but a reason that a lot of people have a problem with medicare and programs like it is that, in order to pay for it, the government taxes people.  If someone doesn't give two shits about the elderly or needy (which is their right) they can't opt out of part of their taxes.  The idea that if someone can't pay for their medical care, it's the responsibility of anyone who is able to pitch in and take care of the cost, once again, is a moral ideal.  There's no hard fact that we are compelled to do so on some deeper, universal level.  Therefore, if someone else doesn't feel that the government should be forcing them to help shoulder the cost of other peoples' medical care, that opinion is as valid as the opinion that we owe it to each other to pay for each other's medical bills.  Get it?  They're both moral values.

What your dude was arguing is that someone with a different arrangement of moral values could only conceivably have that different set of moral standards by way of stupidity or mental/emotional dysfunction.  So arrogant you almost wanna smack him.

This is no different than Christians saying that if you don't believe the bible you're an idiot.

It's also no different than the conservatives who automatically disregard viewpoints that conflict with theirs, which is usually regarding opinions based in morality.  That's why it's incredibly hypocritical of you to be quoting this guy in particular on this post in particular.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



Every time I wonder about if humanity has reached the depths of stupidity you make a post and assure me that it can be worse.


----------



## midcan5

Not2BSubjugated,  I am a bit older - I assume than you - and until republicans and conservatives started using it, I cannot say it was in common usage. There were of course racist and homophobic 'hate,' but that was finally addressed by our judicial system. Please find us an example of a liberal using the word hate. 

Healthcare like medicare, medicaid, minimum wage, child labor laws, and Social Security etc will one day be the right thing to do for most Americans. Corporate think tanks supported by the wealthy will always fight these things that argue for fairness, that may be a law of the universe, one of those givens. Just as there are still racist and homophobes and conspiracy nuts, there will be those whose moral compass is tilted off center. It is  fascinating why this persists, for the interested check out 'Agnotology.'

Quantum Windbag,  you always say the nicest things, thanks. 

Whenever republicans mention 'freedom' think of those ten hands.


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Not2BSubjugated,  I am a bit older - I assume than you - and until republicans and conservatives started using it, I cannot say it was in common usage. There were of course racist and homophobic 'hate,' but that was finally addressed by our judicial system. Please find us an example of a liberal using the word hate.



Howard Dean - Former governor, head of DNC:  I hate Republicans and everything they stand for.​
Plenty more liberal hate speech here:  Violent Liberal Hate Rhetoric: Fifteen Quotes - John Hawkins - Page full


----------



## rdean

They have free will but they have been brainwashed into believing the most fantastic and unbelievable things.  And when you give examples, USMB Republicans say, "That's not what I believe in", but clearly the majority of the party does.


----------



## Bluedog

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



Nothing like the smell of broadbrush in the morning.


----------



## midcan5

Addendum. 

Since ninety five percent of internet debate is either ad hominem or the more childish, 'no, you are,' I want to expand the premise. American conservatives live in a world in which every change is seen as an attack on their personal freedom, on the free market, or on capitalism itself. Hidden behind every change is socialism, environmentalism, or a new world order. This conspiratorial thinking is seen in every complex issue since - jeez, I really don't know - but I'll start with FDR and the New Deal.  Proof that conservative lack freewill can be seen in a vast number of things in which you already know their position. Here are a few, some are simple, some complex: Welfare, pollution/acid rain, tobacco, anthropogenic warming, evolution, sex education, food stamps, the ACA, public education, taxes, and of course government itself when it challenges these three threatened symbols. How this came about is a process that started at the beginning of the last century with advertising and propaganda. Today, as K Street and the many think tanks demonstrate, it has grown to manage the minds of the right, even influencing those who can still stand back and attempt objectivity. Remember the ten hands.


----------



## daveman

rdean said:


> They have free will but they have been brainwashed into believing the most fantastic and unbelievable things.  And when you give examples, USMB Republicans say, "That's not what I believe in", but clearly the majority of the party does.



Fantastic and unbelievable things?

"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal."

First of all, if you've got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan.  Nobody is talking about taking that away from you.  

I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits  either now or in the future.

The NSA is not abusing its power.

I said Benghazi was a terrorist attack from the beginning.

The foreign intelligence Surveillance court is transparent.

First of all, I didn't set a red line.  The world set a red line.

"We began by passing a Recovery Act that has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs.

"I had a uncle who was one of the, who was part of the first American troops to go into Auschwitz and liberate the concentration camps."

Oh, wait -- it's not conservatives who believe those fantastic and unbelievable things.


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Addendum.
> 
> Since ninety five percent of internet debate is either ad hominem or the more childish, 'no, you are,' I want to expand the premise. American conservatives live in a world in which every change is seen as an attack on their personal freedom, on the free market, or on capitalism itself. Hidden behind every change is socialism, environmentalism, or a new world order. This conspiratorial thinking is seen in every complex issue since - jeez, I really don't know - but I'll start with FDR and the New Deal.  Proof that conservative lack freewill can be seen in a vast number of things in which you already know their position. Here are a few, some are simple, some complex: Welfare, pollution/acid rain, tobacco, anthropogenic warming, evolution, sex education, food stamps, the ACA, public education, taxes, and of course government itself when it challenges these three threatened symbols. How this came about is a process that started at the beginning of the last century with advertising and propaganda. Today, as K Street and the many think tanks demonstrate, it has grown to manage the minds of the right, even influencing those who can still stand back and attempt objectivity. Remember the ten hands.


You ever going to get around to proving your claim?  Mindlessly repeating the opinion that was handed to you is not proof.


----------



## daveman

daveman said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not2BSubjugated,  I am a bit older - I assume than you - and until republicans and conservatives started using it, I cannot say it was in common usage. There were of course racist and homophobic 'hate,' but that was finally addressed by our judicial system. Please find us an example of a liberal using the word hate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Howard Dean - Former governor, head of DNC:  I hate Republicans and everything they stand for.​
> Plenty more liberal hate speech here:  Violent Liberal Hate Rhetoric: Fifteen Quotes - John Hawkins - Page full
Click to expand...

 [MENTION=5464]midcan5[/MENTION], did you know that if you pretend this post isn't here, it doesn't actually go away?


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Addendum.
> 
> Since ninety five percent of internet debate is either ad hominem or the more childish, 'no, you are,' I want to expand the premise. American conservatives live in a world in which every change is seen as an attack on their personal freedom, on the free market, or on capitalism itself. Hidden behind every change is socialism, environmentalism, or a new world order. This conspiratorial thinking is seen in every complex issue since - jeez, I really don't know - but I'll start with FDR and the New Deal.  Proof that conservative lack freewill can be seen in a vast number of things in which you already know their position. Here are a few, some are simple, some complex: Welfare, pollution/acid rain, tobacco, anthropogenic warming, evolution, sex education, food stamps, the ACA, public education, taxes, and of course government itself when it challenges these three threatened symbols. How this came about is a process that started at the beginning of the last century with advertising and propaganda. Today, as K Street and the many think tanks demonstrate, it has grown to manage the minds of the right, even influencing those who can still stand back and attempt objectivity. Remember the ten hands.



You start a thread with an ad hominen attack, and then complain when you get treated the same way. 

I think that makes you the problem, not the solution.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Not2BSubjugated,  I am a bit older - I assume than you - and until republicans and conservatives started using it, I cannot say it was in common usage. There were of course racist and homophobic 'hate,' but that was finally addressed by our judicial system. Please find us an example of a liberal using the word hate.
> 
> Healthcare like medicare, medicaid, minimum wage, child labor laws, and Social Security etc will one day be the right thing to do for most Americans. Corporate think tanks supported by the wealthy will always fight these things that argue for fairness, that may be a law of the universe, one of those givens. Just as there are still racist and homophobes and conspiracy nuts, there will be those whose moral compass is tilted off center. It is  fascinating why this persists, for the interested check out 'Agnotology.'
> 
> Quantum Windbag,  you always say the nicest things, thanks.
> 
> Whenever republicans mention 'freedom' think of those ten hands.



You know who else will always argue against government mandated "fairness"?  Anyone for whom individual freedoms rank higher on the values list than "the good of society" as defined by whoever's claiming to be the authority on what is fair.

So if I don't believe in government mandated wealth sharing in the forms of medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, it's because my moral compass is tilted off center?  By off center do you mean away from mainstream, or are you trying to tell me that you're qualified to identify correct morals from incorrect morals?  Seems to me that, if you're able to identify that on a factual level, all these religions and philosophers are wasting their time, because to know which morals are correct you must know the true nature of the universe and which universal standard of morality is actually a hard value, and not a misinformed opinion.

And if you mean away from mainstream and aren't making a ridiculous philosophical claim, then please explain to me how not having the same morals as everybody else is some kind of mental or emotional malfunction.

Cuz that's what this part of your argument boils down to:  Either you somehow think that your version of right and wrong is the correct version and superior to anyone else's version of right and wrong, or you think that not sharing the same version of right and wrong as the majority is a mental malfunction.

So when Hitler said fuck the jews, let's arrest them all and take over the world, any of the German minority who questioned that course of action, which had a -lot- of support, were actually mentally ill.  Those guys marching the jews into gas chambers were just doing what any sane, mentally healthy individual would do, and going with the flock.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Addendum.
> 
> Since ninety five percent of internet debate is either ad hominem or the more childish, 'no, you are,' I want to expand the premise. American conservatives live in a world in which every change is seen as an attack on their personal freedom, on the free market, or on capitalism itself. Hidden behind every change is socialism, environmentalism, or a new world order. This conspiratorial thinking is seen in every complex issue since - jeez, I really don't know - but I'll start with FDR and the New Deal.  Proof that conservative lack freewill can be seen in a vast number of things in which you already know their position. Here are a few, some are simple, some complex: Welfare, pollution/acid rain, tobacco, anthropogenic warming, evolution, sex education, food stamps, the ACA, public education, taxes, and of course government itself when it challenges these three threatened symbols. How this came about is a process that started at the beginning of the last century with advertising and propaganda. Today, as K Street and the many think tanks demonstrate, it has grown to manage the minds of the right, even influencing those who can still stand back and attempt objectivity. Remember the ten hands.



So this represents a lack of free will?

Here's what you just did here:  You identified three of the primary values of many conservatives, then you listed a bunch of issues where those three primary values decide which side of the issue that those people holding those values are on.

Essentially, you just said that conservatives lack free will because they base their opinions on their values.

I hate to break this to you, but if someone whose issue-by-issue opinions are based on their values is someone who lacks free will, then -nobody- has free will.  Value-based opinions are not phenomena native to the landscape of the conservative mind.

Value-based opinions include -all- opinions held by -all- reasoning creatures.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

Also, just for kicks:

With this post alone, you've shown that not only are you a hardcore lefty who thinks anyone who disagrees with you is stupid or mentally deficient, but you've also shown a complete inability to even dissect the arguments that -you're- making, which doesn't give me a lot of faith in your ability to analyze input.

So, when you're literally the -only- person "older than me" who I've ever heard make the claim that the word "hate" was made popular by "republicans and conservatives", I gotta call bullshit.

I'm guessing this was also past the turn of the century?  I only say that because, before that was the age of the Dixiecrats, back when the party associated with racism was actually the Democrat party.  So if Republicans made hate popular, it must have been sometime in the last 70'ish years?

Before that, hate was rarely used?

LMFAO

Since you asked for examples of liberals using the word hate (which is a pretty f'in hilarious thing to want documentation to back up), I'll make a similar request.

Show me proof that republicans were the ones that made hate a household term.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Not2BSubjugated said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Addendum.
> 
> Since ninety five percent of internet debate is either ad hominem or the more childish, 'no, you are,' I want to expand the premise. American conservatives live in a world in which every change is seen as an attack on their personal freedom, on the free market, or on capitalism itself. Hidden behind every change is socialism, environmentalism, or a new world order. This conspiratorial thinking is seen in every complex issue since - jeez, I really don't know - but I'll start with FDR and the New Deal.  Proof that conservative lack freewill can be seen in a vast number of things in which you already know their position. Here are a few, some are simple, some complex: Welfare, pollution/acid rain, tobacco, anthropogenic warming, evolution, sex education, food stamps, the ACA, public education, taxes, and of course government itself when it challenges these three threatened symbols. How this came about is a process that started at the beginning of the last century with advertising and propaganda. Today, as K Street and the many think tanks demonstrate, it has grown to manage the minds of the right, even influencing those who can still stand back and attempt objectivity. Remember the ten hands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So this represents a lack of free will?
> 
> Here's what you just did here:  You identified three of the primary values of many conservatives, then you listed a bunch of issues where those three primary values decide which side of the issue that those people holding those values are on.
> 
> Essentially, you just said that conservatives lack free will because they base their opinions on their values.
> 
> I hate to break this to you, but if someone whose issue-by-issue opinions are based on their values is someone who lacks free will, then -nobody- has free will.  Value-based opinions are not phenomena native to the landscape of the conservative mind.
> 
> Value-based opinions include -all- opinions held by -all- reasoning creatures.
Click to expand...


You are probably wasting your time. Even if he actually listens to you, he will end up pretending he always believed he agrees with you.


----------



## midcan5

daveman said:


> ....did you know that if you pretend this post isn't here, it doesn't actually go away?



I did glance at that and a mea culpa is in order. If I were a right wing fundamentalist as most of you are, I'd claim that's because of the right's use of it first. But being a freedom loving liberal, I will say it is uncalled for and diminishes the spokesperson. I did check on Dean's comment and he did wish he had said he hated republican policies, but that's a poor excuse. Like the child who gets caught. 

I have to read through the other comments when time permits to see if there is any challenge to my premise that I already know your response and I know why. So far the premise holds.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....did you know that if you pretend this post isn't here, it doesn't actually go away?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did glance at that and a mea culpa is in order. If I were a right wing fundamentalist as most of you are, I'd claim that's because of the right's use of it first. But being a freedom loving liberal, I will say it is uncalled for and diminishes the spokesperson. I did check on Dean's comment and he did wish he had said he hated republican policies, but that's a poor excuse. Like the child who gets caught.
> 
> I have to read through the other comments when time permits to see if there is any challenge to my premise that I already know your response and I know why. So far the premise holds.
Click to expand...


If you were really a freedom living liberal you wouldn't see a need to insult people who disagree with you. you would realize that different people have different values, and can see other things as a priority, and you would want them to have the freedom to make their own choices based on those values. Since that is not you, you are not a freedom living liberal.


----------



## midcan5

Not2BSubjugated,  you're missing the point, you can dress them up in the finest finery but your freedom loving republicans all sing the same tune. Were you asleep during the last election, did you not see the machine crush Romney every time he moved away from the script. Did you not see them kowtow to ideas because they had to kowtow. Point still holds, corporate think tanks manage the minds of American conservatives. Socialism is coming, socialism is coming!!!! And when did the republican party become a bunch of relativists - you need to revise that thought. 

Quantum Windbag, situation meet Quantum, now we must respect every idea, every value, that's precious, do I have to mention lots of ideas that are not too precious. Freedom gives me too the ability to call someone's idea stupid. Funny I recall you using that just above somewhere. Can you spell hypocritical. 

Whenever a republican conservative mentions freedom remember those ten hands.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Not2BSubjugated,  you're missing the point, you can dress them up in the finest finery but your freedom loving republicans all sing the same tune. Were you asleep during the last election, did you not see the machine crush Romney every time he moved away from the script. Did you not see them kowtow to ideas because they had to kowtow. Point still holds, corporate think tanks manage the minds of American conservatives. Socialism is coming, socialism is coming!!!! And when did the republican party become a bunch of relativists - you need to revise that thought.
> 
> Quantum Windbag, situation meet Quantum, now we must respect every idea, every value, that's precious, do I have to mention lots of ideas that are not too precious. Freedom gives me too the ability to call someone's idea stupid. Funny I recall you using that just above somewhere. Can you spell hypocritical.
> 
> Whenever a republican conservative mentions freedom remember those ten hands.



I don't respect every idea, asshole. I do, however, understand that I am not always right. I also understand that, even when I am right, it is possible for other people to be disagree with me and not be wrong. People have different value systems, that doesn't mean they are wrong, even when I mock them. I understand that compassion trumps common sense for some people, but I will never force those people to live by common sense if they prefer to allow thieves access to their bank accounts. I only really object when they insist that the thieves should have access to other people's accounts.

I also understand the simple fact that there are more than two options in politics.


----------



## Billo_Really

You should see the cow they have when we free willie.


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....did you know that if you pretend this post isn't here, it doesn't actually go away?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did glance at that and a mea culpa is in order. If I were a right wing fundamentalist as most of you are, I'd claim that's because of the right's use of it first. But being a freedom loving liberal, I will say it is uncalled for and diminishes the spokesperson. I did check on Dean's comment and he did wish he had said he hated republican policies, but that's a poor excuse. Like the child who gets caught.
> 
> I have to read through the other comments when time permits to see if there is any challenge to my premise that I already know your response and I know why. So far the premise holds.
Click to expand...

Circular logic.  "I want it to be true, so it's true."

You're not a bright person.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Not2BSubjugated,  you're missing the point, you can dress them up in the finest finery but your freedom loving republicans all sing the same tune. Were you asleep during the last election, did you not see the machine crush Romney every time he moved away from the script. Did you not see them kowtow to ideas because they had to kowtow. Point still holds, corporate think tanks manage the minds of American conservatives. Socialism is coming, socialism is coming!!!! And when did the republican party become a bunch of relativists - you need to revise that thought.
> 
> Quantum Windbag, situation meet Quantum, now we must respect every idea, every value, that's precious, do I have to mention lots of ideas that are not too precious. Freedom gives me too the ability to call someone's idea stupid. Funny I recall you using that just above somewhere. Can you spell hypocritical.
> 
> Whenever a republican conservative mentions freedom remember those ten hands.



So that's what it finally boils down to when all the other reasoning's been shot down.

You can tell that republican conservatives lack free will because they all have the same opinions?

First off, I'm sure that you're aware that the Republican party's widely regarded as having split into two primary factions:  neocons and tea partiers.  So realistically, they sing at least two different tunes.

That's neither here nor there.

Essentially your point came down to conservatives following the party line because they're told what to think, which is, according to you, controlled by corporate think tanks.

Here's where we can agree.  Most republicans are told what to think by republican controlled media sources.  Here's where you probably won't agree.  Most democrats are told what to think by liberal and democrat controlled media sources.

Do you know why whoever won American Idol for those first few years made insane sales on their following album releases?

Do you know why, across the country, the radio stations with the highest ratings are the radio stations playing back whatever 12 or 13 songs MTV has in rotation at any given time?

Do you know why more people buy Cocopuffs than the 1/2 priced Maltomeal generic shit that tastes identical?

Because -people- and not just conservatives are conditioned to think whatever the fuck their tv tells them to think.

Still doubt that Democrats are guilty of this same lack of intellectual self-initiative?  How many different tunes to the Dems sing?  Silly thing to point out that everyone in a political party has the same political views, though.  That's why they're in the same political party, after all.  The right's just like the left.  You've got the establishment politicians in the middle. . . most of them look moderate because they don't really exemplify principals.  They do whatever's politically expedient and are typically more worried about keeping their jobs than doing their jobs.

At the edges you've got Marxist/occupy types on the left and tea party and libertarian types on the right.  I really don't see how one party or the other can be said to have more varied opinions.  You know why that is?

Cuz most of us having these political discussions were born and raised in this country, or in the Western hemisphere, where that's the -entire- range of political philosophies anyone's likely to have been raised hearing about.  Another one we all share:  we generally tend to believe the principals and philosophies with which we were raised.  Most people are basically sheep when it comes to anything as abstract as philosophy.  That's why you don't see a lot of people in the western hemisphere arguing for a return to monarchy, or lobbying to get their governments to become religious theocracies.  These systems have generally been frowned upon for a few generations everywhere west of the atlantic, and so people born into societies on this side of the planet generally weren't raised being taught that there was any merit to these systems.  If people had more "free will" as you so inaptly put it, you'd see more wacky political ideas than you do that don't really fall under any popular democrat or republican leaning philosophies.

Brings me to my last point.  The fact that most -people- (not republicans, not democrats, not liberals, not conservatives, but most -people-) believe whatever their conservative or liberal media sources tell them doesn't in the least demonstrate a lack of free will.  It demonstrates both intellectual laziness and/or a general lack of critical thinking skills.  We live in a society that has very little respect for education and intelligence where, generally, recreational intellectual pursuits are looked upon as nerdy or dorky.  Why read if you don't have to?  LEt's pound some beers and watch 2 and a half men!  (I actually kinda liked that show when Charlie was on it).  So if most people are preconditioned to not want to do things like read or think if they don't have to, you can expect nothing less than a political landscape packed full of parrots repeating the latest dem or rep sound bytes ad nauseam.

This entire post and the fact that you only notice that the opposing side is guilty of this leads me to believe that you're one of those parrots


----------



## midcan5

Yesterday every conservative republican, every conservative talking head, every presumed free spirit tea partier, all said 'they were willing to compromise.' Imagine that for a moment. I joked that the repeating of the same words, the same ideas required an implanted teleprompter, but maybe there is simpler reason for their demonstration of a lack of freewill, maybe the point guy text messages them their thoughts. All the debate on why my premise is untrue is thrown to the wind. When it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quakes like a duck, there must be something at work. Allow a joke, maybe it is simply a self imposed lack of freewill for otherwise what the heck would they do? They surely do nothing constructive for the nation. Nothing.

When ever a tea party republican or conservative republican mentions freedom, remember those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England



> Not2BSubjugated, you often sound like a preacher? I may comment when time permits on your sermon. No offence meant Minister/Father/Rabbi/Mullah.




"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." Richard Feynman


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Yesterday every conservative republican, every conservative talking head, every presumed free spirit tea partier, all said 'they were willing to compromise.' Imagine that for a moment. I joked that the repeating of the same words, the same ideas required an implanted teleprompter, but maybe there is simpler reason for their demonstration of a lack of freewill, maybe the point guy text messages them their thoughts. All the debate on why my premise is untrue is thrown to the wind. When it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quakes like a duck, there must be something at work. Allow a joke, maybe it is simply a self imposed lack of freewill for otherwise what the heck would they do? They surely do nothing constructive for the nation. Nothing.
> 
> When ever a tea party republican or conservative republican mentions freedom, remember those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not2BSubjugated, you often sound like a preacher? I may comment when time permits on your sermon. No offence meant Minister/Father/Rabbi/Mullah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." Richard Feynman
Click to expand...

Yesterday every liberal Democrat, every liberal talking head, every presumed free spirit progressive, all said "It's the Republicans' fault!"

But they all simultaneously arrived at that conclusion independently, right?  Just sheer coincidence.  Yeah.  HAS to be.

Right, middie?


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Yesterday every conservative republican, every conservative talking head, every presumed free spirit tea partier, all said 'they were willing to compromise.' Imagine that for a moment. I joked that the repeating of the same words, the same ideas required an implanted teleprompter, but maybe there is simpler reason for their demonstration of a lack of freewill, maybe the point guy text messages them their thoughts. All the debate on why my premise is untrue is thrown to the wind. When it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quakes like a duck, there must be something at work. Allow a joke, maybe it is simply a self imposed lack of freewill for otherwise what the heck would they do? They surely do nothing constructive for the nation. Nothing.
> 
> When ever a tea party republican or conservative republican mentions freedom, remember those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not2BSubjugated, you often sound like a preacher? I may comment when time permits on your sermon. No offence meant Minister/Father/Rabbi/Mullah.
> 
> 
> 
> "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." Richard Feynman
Click to expand...


That site is almost as funny as The Onion, and half as serious.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated

midcan5 said:


> Yesterday every conservative republican, every conservative talking head, every presumed free spirit tea partier, all said 'they were willing to compromise.' Imagine that for a moment. I joked that the repeating of the same words, the same ideas required an implanted teleprompter, but maybe there is simpler reason for their demonstration of a lack of freewill, maybe the point guy text messages them their thoughts. All the debate on why my premise is untrue is thrown to the wind. When it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quakes like a duck, there must be something at work. Allow a joke, maybe it is simply a self imposed lack of freewill for otherwise what the heck would they do? They surely do nothing constructive for the nation. Nothing.
> 
> When ever a tea party republican or conservative republican mentions freedom, remember those ten hands. The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not2BSubjugated, you often sound like a preacher? I may comment when time permits on your sermon. No offence meant Minister/Father/Rabbi/Mullah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." Richard Feynman
Click to expand...


I love your little jabs.  So random.

Anyway, the reason for all the republicans on TV yesterday saying they were willing to negotiate might be even simpler than the one you offer up.  It might be that, considering that the congress sent three different proposals out, "the right" has been willing to negotiate the whole time.  Maybe the people who observed that through lenses uncolored by the assumption that any peel back on Obamacare is evil simply agreed on what they were watching.

Is that so hard to imagine?  That people with similar values would come to the same conclusions on what they were watching in politics?

Also, how does this prove your conclusion that "conservatives" lack free will?  Simply because the ones you seen on TV were saying the same shit?  You've never noticed Democrats doing the same thing?  Cuz I've seen plenty of footage of it.

Also, simply because the TV talking heads were parroting a point, this is enough reason for you to feel safe in the assumption that -all- republicans and tea partiers were parroting the same thought, and thus all conservatives are told what to think?

Good lord, man.  Reading someone with your apparent intellect take on a topic as abstract as free will is like listening to my pot dealer ramble on about the spiritual power of crystals.  Leaps and leaps and leaps of logic.  I get winded.


----------



## midcan5

Not2BSubjugated, et al 

It's neat of you to claim the republican party is split between different factions, but the truth is they all do the same two step. You see that clearly in their congressional voting. Yes, corporations have great power so we agree there, where we disagree is that a liberal media exists and thus controls the left. I don't see this because the left cannot get its act together any longer. Examples abound, Clinton kowtowing to corporations over NAFTA among other stupid political actions he took. He sold out and his wonderful reputation today is as imaginary as Reagan's. If for the sake of social agreement I were to admit republican divergence, it would be social/religious vs economic/libertarian.

I agree on the power of TV ads but you give them too much credit. Check Trader Joe's or Whole Foods as counter examples of that tasteless stuff the pretentious eater eats. Of course in America even eating carries a certain symbolism. Familiarity does lead to more sales but that still requires some desire on the part of the audience. Yes, Dem's too exhibit all these same traits, my personal reason for being more democratic is they occasionally do the good thing. But locally I have voted for more republicans often. I would be an independent, but that is kinda a useless position, esp in Philly.

Getting outside that box (life) is a tough task but sometimes, slowly, change, progress, call it whatever, happens. Witness the changing attitudes towards gays in America. Odd you mention monarchy, I have actually heard a few conservative teachers I know wish for a benevolent dictator. In their mind they want simple. But again we agree, one can only know what what knows. (read Stanley Fish sometime)

Off topic. I disliked 'two and a half dorks,' lol. Actually I can't stand most TV, what the heck is the appeal of 'the big bang theory' or 'Modern Family,' as a child I liked 'leave it to beaver,' at least that was a nice unreality. On topic. My use of freewill was a bit of hyperbole, actually we all lack freewill as you more or less noted above. That can be another discussion. So the predicament is given our fixed ideas how is it we do the right thing. I would not agree that both sides are the same, while both sides are often useless, at least there are brief moments when the democrats, the more liberal democrats, do the right thing, the good thing. of course when only fools run for office, fools run things, that's everyone's fault who doesn't vote nor pay attention. The usual equivalency comeback, as noted by my two friends above, doesn't work, there are real differences sometimes it's only 5 to 4.

PS time to read the NYT so I know what to think today. hahahaha


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Amazing this thread is in "Philosophy"

Laughable


----------



## Quantum Windbag

CrusaderFrank said:


> Amazing this thread is in "Philosophy"
> 
> Laughable



I think it belongs here, philosophy has been a joke since the death of Aristotle.


----------



## midcan5

Below is another piece supporting the contention of the OP that conservatives today in America lack freedom to think on their own. Philosophically a lack of freewill or responsible decision making. I've repeated how those ten hands rose as if some puppet master pulled their strings, the below outlines the string controllers. 

"Out of that session, held one morning in a location the members insist on keeping secret, came a little-noticed blueprint to defunding Obamacare, signed by Mr. Meese and leaders of more than three dozen conservative groups.... It articulated a take-no-prisoners legislative strategy that had long percolated in conservative circles: that Republicans could derail the health care overhaul if conservative lawmakers were willing to push fellow Republicans  including their cautious leaders  into cutting off financing for the entire federal government." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a-federal-budget-crisis-months-in-the-planning.html


Consider too the comment from one conservative republican in the house that they did not even know what they would get out their radical shutdown. Again an example of a lack of responsible thought. Followers instead of leaders. 

"[P]eople like the Republican in the House who said he and his colleagues have to get something out of this. And I dont know what that even is."" http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/collins-frankenstein-goes-to-congress.html


----------



## PredFan

Stephanie said:


> lol, that's what a lot of people ask about you liberals/lefties
> 
> you all seem to march in lockstep with the party and regurgitate everything they say...



Apparently the OP is trying to redefine Free Will.

Hell, he doesn't even know that it's two separate words.


----------



## PredFan

Trajan said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> genes? oh, so its in the dna, right, got it
> 
> freewill? so pelosi marching just about every blue dog over a cliff certainly was freewill alright....jesus, do you read what you post?
Click to expand...


Nope, for him it's just "copy and paste", it's never "_read_, copy and paste".


----------



## PredFan

CrusaderFrank said:


> I love USMB because its puts to rest the myth of Liberal intellectual superiority



That's why I don't put most of these liberals on ignore. Their posts are a continuous reminder that I'm on the correct side.


----------



## PredFan

midcan5 said:


> My mention of the Hirschman's book was for historical reasons, Hirschman does criticize contemporary liberals for the same repetitive sloganism and solutions. But conservatives have practiced ostrich thinking for three hundred years. The lack of freewill exhibited by conservatives is evident in our congress and especially in their media channels. My point is on another level than even the historical, it is more about their culture. Today when you listen to any conservative talking head or representative, they all say the same things. The same things. How is that possible if they are conscious, freedom loving individuals, it's not possible. It would only be possible if some receiver were implanted in their head. That hopefully is not the case so one must look to their culture. Sometimes though labels fit poorly, picking and choosing a single exception as some noted above, does not prove much. I have posted several broad satiric comments on the right, it is only the right's puppet like behavior that allows that to be possible. My signature contains two. Conservatives can deny reality but their constant repeating of the same slogans, the same empty ideas, shows clearly no freewill is present. Remember the ten hands rising, if you doubt that.



Both the irony and hypocrisy meters are pegged with this one post. Congratulations.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Below is another piece supporting the contention of the OP that conservatives today in America lack freedom to think on their own. Philosophically a lack of freewill or responsible decision making. I've repeated how those ten hands rose as if some puppet master pulled their strings, the below outlines the string controllers.
> 
> "Out of that session, held one morning in a location the members insist on keeping secret, came a little-noticed blueprint to defunding Obamacare, signed by Mr. Meese and leaders of more than three dozen conservative groups.... It articulated a take-no-prisoners legislative strategy that had long percolated in conservative circles: that Republicans could derail the health care overhaul if conservative lawmakers were willing to push fellow Republicans  including their cautious leaders  into cutting off financing for the entire federal government." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a-federal-budget-crisis-months-in-the-planning.html
> 
> 
> Consider too the comment from one conservative republican in the house that they did not even know what they would get out their radical shutdown. Again an example of a lack of responsible thought. Followers instead of leaders.
> 
> "[P]eople like the Republican in the House who said he and his colleagues have to get something out of this. And I dont know what that even is."" http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/opinion/collins-frankenstein-goes-to-congress.html



I suggest you look up confrontations bias, and then go stuff your idiotic attempt to insist that a group of people who are openly feuding to the everlasting joy of nightly news anchors everywhere are a monolithic block incapable of independent thought.


----------



## midcan5

PredFan said:


> Nope, for him it's just "copy and paste", it's never "_read_, copy and paste".



That is a skill I admit to lacking, you'll have to explain how you read before you write what you write. I may need to clarify that sentence, let me know.



PredFan said:


> Both the irony and hypocrisy meters are pegged with this one post. Congratulations.



Ah irony, good word, two conflicting ideas, ah, another complex thought, there may be help for you yet, you're learning. Hypocrisy is a stretch, you need an explanation. 

"If by relativism one means a cast of mind that renders you unable to prefer your own convictions to those of your adversary, then relativism could hardly end because it never began. Our convictions are by definition preferred; that's what makes them our convictions. Relativizing them is neither an option nor a danger. ¶ But if by relativism one means the practice of putting yourself in your adversary's shoes, not in order to wear them as your own but in order to have some understanding (far short of approval) of why someone else might want to wear them, then relativism will not and should not end, because it is simply another name for serious thought."  Stanley Fish



Quantum Windbag said:


> I suggest you look up confrontations bias, and then go stuff your idiotic attempt to insist that a group of people who are openly feuding to the everlasting joy of nightly news anchors everywhere are a monolithic block incapable of independent thought.



I'm missing something, mostly the independent thought. Care to detail.


Remember those ten hands when any republican conservative mentions freedom. 
.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest you look up confrontations bias, and then go stuff your idiotic attempt to insist that a group of people who are openly feuding to the everlasting joy of nightly news anchors everywhere are a monolithic block incapable of independent thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm missing something, mostly the independent thought. Care to detail.
> 
> 
> Remember those ten hands when any republican conservative mentions freedom.
> .
Click to expand...


Yes, you are missing something, a brain. If you had a brain you would realize that the very people you accuse of being incapable of thinking are actually fighting.

Republican Infighting Will Hurt the Party: McCain: Video - Bloomberg

Not sure how to detail a brain for you. I know I wouldn't waste my time if I knew hoe because you already wasted the one you were issued when you were born.


----------



## midcan5

Quantum Windbag said:


> Yes, you are missing something, a brain. If you had a brain you would realize that the very people you accuse of being incapable of thinking are actually fighting....



I check with several people and found yes, I do have a mind also know as the brain. I sorta  knew that already but thought I'd check.  Conservatives do not have freewill, if they were asked an assortment of questions concerning government, taxes, welfare, etc, you can be assured they would all answer the same. Is there really a need to go over some of those questions. If the republicans are fighting among themselves then it must be that there are moderates or liberal republicans, that's a good thing. Let's hope they win the battle over those so ideologically burdened freewill is missing from their minds.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are missing something, a brain. If you had a brain you would realize that the very people you accuse of being incapable of thinking are actually fighting....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I check with several people and found yes, I do have a mind also know as the brain. I sorta  knew that already but thought I'd check.  Conservatives do not have freewill, if they were asked an assortment of questions concerning government, taxes, welfare, etc, you can be assured they would all answer the same. Is there really a need to go over some of those questions. If the republicans are fighting among themselves then it must be that there are moderates or liberal republicans, that's a good thing. Let's hope they win the battle over those so ideologically burdened freewill is missing from their minds.
Click to expand...


You checked with several people? Were any of them real?


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are missing something, a brain. If you had a brain you would realize that the very people you accuse of being incapable of thinking are actually fighting....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I check with several people and found yes, I do have a mind also know as the brain. I sorta  knew that already but thought I'd check.  Conservatives do not have freewill, if they were asked an assortment of questions concerning government, taxes, welfare, etc, you can be assured they would all answer the same. Is there really a need to go over some of those questions. If the republicans are fighting among themselves then it must be that there are moderates or liberal republicans, that's a good thing. Let's hope they win the battle over those so ideologically burdened freewill is missing from their minds.
Click to expand...

It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.

Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?


----------



## Quantum Windbag

daveman said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are missing something, a brain. If you had a brain you would realize that the very people you accuse of being incapable of thinking are actually fighting....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I check with several people and found yes, I do have a mind also know as the brain. I sorta  knew that already but thought I'd check.  Conservatives do not have freewill, if they were asked an assortment of questions concerning government, taxes, welfare, etc, you can be assured they would all answer the same. Is there really a need to go over some of those questions. If the republicans are fighting among themselves then it must be that there are moderates or liberal republicans, that's a good thing. Let's hope they win the battle over those so ideologically burdened freewill is missing from their minds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
Click to expand...


Be fair, he didn't see anything in my post that proved him wrong because he is incapable of seeing anything that isn't approved by the Church Of Obama.


----------



## daveman

Quantum Windbag said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I check with several people and found yes, I do have a mind also know as the brain. I sorta  knew that already but thought I'd check.  Conservatives do not have freewill, if they were asked an assortment of questions concerning government, taxes, welfare, etc, you can be assured they would all answer the same. Is there really a need to go over some of those questions. If the republicans are fighting among themselves then it must be that there are moderates or liberal republicans, that's a good thing. Let's hope they win the battle over those so ideologically burdened freewill is missing from their minds.
> 
> 
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Be fair, he didn't see anything in my post that proved him wrong because he is incapable of seeing anything that isn't approved by the Church Of Obama.
Click to expand...

Of course.  That's because he lacks free will.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

daveman said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be fair, he didn't see anything in my post that proved him wrong because he is incapable of seeing anything that isn't approved by the Church Of Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course.  That's because he lacks free will.
Click to expand...


Everyone has free will, some people just don't use it.


----------



## daveman

Quantum Windbag said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be fair, he didn't see anything in my post that proved him wrong because he is incapable of seeing anything that isn't approved by the Church Of Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course.  That's because he lacks free will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everyone has free will, some people just don't use it.
Click to expand...

True.  And some people run away from it because it scares the hell out of them.

Hence the rising chorus of people looking to government to make all their decisions for them.


----------



## midcan5

Ah come on guys circle jerks are so old school.  Is confirmation bias sorta like two internet posters confirming each others bias?  

A few thoughts below for the still open minded who may be able to break away from the conservative thought control machine. 

"To me, the first thing to do is to explain in sympathetic ways what kind of pressures the white working class faces today, without caving in to tendencies within a segment of this class to demonize minorities.

The second is to remind people forcefully how many times tax cuts for the rich and market deregulation have generated economic crises, starting with the Great Depression.

The third, and most fundamental, is to challenge head on Republican definitions of freedom through anti-labor and anti-consumer policies of the state joined to a vision of market self-sufficiency, elaborating a richer story of how freedom works and how deregulated markets demean it.

The fourth, which can only work if the third is under way, is to propose an ambitious jobs program that, if passed, would simultaneously rebuild the infrastructure to meet the needs of the twenty-first century, provide meaningful jobs for high school graduates, stimulate the economy, and promote real freedom for families, workers and consumers.

The fifth is to insist, against the grain of the Republican story, that tax increases for the rich and a regulated economy are desperately needed to avoid a new version of the most recent meltdown."  William E. Connolly  

See The Contemporary Condition: The Republican Pincer Machine


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> Ah come on guys circle jerks are so old school.  Is confirmation bias sorta like two internet posters confirming each others bias?


Conformation bias is exactly what you're doing.


----------



## daveman

daveman said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are missing something, a brain. If you had a brain you would realize that the very people you accuse of being incapable of thinking are actually fighting....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I check with several people and found yes, I do have a mind also know as the brain. I sorta  knew that already but thought I'd check.  Conservatives do not have freewill, if they were asked an assortment of questions concerning government, taxes, welfare, etc, you can be assured they would all answer the same. Is there really a need to go over some of those questions. If the republicans are fighting among themselves then it must be that there are moderates or liberal republicans, that's a good thing. Let's hope they win the battle over those so ideologically burdened freewill is missing from their minds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
Click to expand...

Hey, middie:

Here's another post you can pretend doesn't exist.


----------



## midcan5

daveman said:


> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
> 
> Hey, middie:
> 
> Here's another post you can pretend doesn't exist.



Huh, McCain was a Maverick, remember. I listened to that piece and even there there was no divergence from the conservative republican fight to stop the ACA.  I saw no proof of any alternate thought on his part.  One would need to read into his comments more than what was there. You can accept that if you like but it proves nothing. He actually repeated much of the same talking points supporting my premise.  OT John is a bit of an oddity, occasionally he sounds liberal, other times moderate, and then he falls back into the programmed lines world.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> Ah come on guys circle jerks are so old school.  Is confirmation bias sorta like two internet posters confirming each others bias?
> 
> A few thoughts below for the still open minded who may be able to break away from the conservative thought control machine.
> 
> "To me, the first thing to do is to explain in sympathetic ways what kind of pressures the white working class faces today, without caving in to tendencies within a segment of this class to demonize minorities.
> 
> The second is to remind people forcefully how many times tax cuts for the rich and market deregulation have generated economic crises, starting with the Great Depression.
> 
> The third, and most fundamental, is to challenge head on Republican definitions of freedom through anti-labor and anti-consumer policies of the state joined to a vision of market self-sufficiency, elaborating a richer story of how freedom works and how deregulated markets demean it.
> 
> The fourth, which can only work if the third is under way, is to propose an ambitious jobs program that, if passed, would simultaneously rebuild the infrastructure to meet the needs of the twenty-first century, provide meaningful jobs for high school graduates, stimulate the economy, and promote real freedom for families, workers and consumers.
> 
> The fifth is to insist, against the grain of the Republican story, that tax increases for the rich and a regulated economy are desperately needed to avoid a new version of the most recent meltdown."  William E. Connolly
> 
> See The Contemporary Condition: The Republican Pincer Machine



Confirmation bias like ignoring the parts of my posts that provide proof that conservatives are not a monolithic block?


----------



## Quantum Windbag

midcan5 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
> 
> Hey, middie:
> 
> Here's another post you can pretend doesn't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huh, McCain was a Maverick, remember. I listened to that piece and even there there was no divergence from the conservative republican fight to stop the ACA.  I saw no proof of any alternate thought on his part.  One would need to read into his comments more than what was there. You can accept that if you like but it proves nothing. He actually repeated much of the same talking points supporting my premise.  OT John is a bit of an oddity, occasionally he sounds liberal, other times moderate, and then he falls back into the programmed lines world.
Click to expand...


McCain and McConnell agreeing with Obama about the Tea Party is proof that conservatives have no free will?


----------



## daveman

midcan5 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
> 
> Hey, middie:
> 
> Here's another post you can pretend doesn't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huh, McCain was a Maverick, remember. I listened to that piece and even there there was no divergence from the conservative republican fight to stop the ACA.  I saw no proof of any alternate thought on his part.  One would need to read into his comments more than what was there. You can accept that if you like but it proves nothing. He actually repeated much of the same talking points supporting my premise.  OT John is a bit of an oddity, occasionally he sounds liberal, other times moderate, and then he falls back into the programmed lines world.
Click to expand...

Come to think of it, I've never seen you present anything original.

Does middie lack free will?

Sure looks like, doesn't it?


----------



## Sunshine

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



That is the dumbest thing I have ever read.  Conservatives disagree with one another all the time.  It is only you sick liberals who are in complete lockstep with one another like a bunch of goose stepping Nazis.


----------



## daveman

Quantum Windbag said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's telling you you edited from his post the proof that conservatives do indeed have free will.
> 
> Do you really believe that means the evidence doesn't actually exist?  Do you, like most progressives, believe that your views define reality?  That if you ignore something, it really is not there?
> 
> Hey, middie:
> 
> Here's another post you can pretend doesn't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huh, McCain was a Maverick, remember. I listened to that piece and even there there was no divergence from the conservative republican fight to stop the ACA.  I saw no proof of any alternate thought on his part.  One would need to read into his comments more than what was there. You can accept that if you like but it proves nothing. He actually repeated much of the same talking points supporting my premise.  OT John is a bit of an oddity, occasionally he sounds liberal, other times moderate, and then he falls back into the programmed lines world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> McCain and McConnell agreeing with Obama about the Tea Party is proof that conservatives have no free will?
Click to expand...

According to progressive "logic" that middie mindlessly parrots...yes.


----------



## midcan5

LOL


----------



## chikenwing

midcan5 said:


> Is it possible to lack freewill: the basic idea that conscious analysis guides your decisions. I think it is certainly worth our consideration. It may just be that conservatives lack the capacity, both genetically and culturally to exhibit freewill. This interplay of genes and culture make them easily susceptible to the influence of ideas that oppose change or revision. Most cognitive processes never reach consciousness, thus if you are conservative, thought would require an awareness you are not capable of. Given the widespread power of their media today, you witness an opposition to change repeated over and over again. No rational discussion is possible when you have the answer already. The final question becomes, are conservatives then a threat to a dynamic, open, democratic society?
> 
> See 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman



Words of wisdom from a member of the Borg,priceless!!


----------



## Tor Hershman

According to Indeterminism AND Determinism, as I comprehend each, Free-Will is impossible - with or without a God/Satan thingy...Free-Will just ain't.

As much as I enjoy thinkin'/feelin'/functioning as a being with vast free-will (a.k.a. A big fat loud mouth) I'm pretty sure [as I must] Free-Will is an illusion and no one ever has nor ever will have it.


----------

