Are conservatives smarter than liberals?

[rdean]

Every day on this board we seem to have threads about 'how stupid are libs?', 'dimbocrats', 'typical liberal stupidity'....you know the drill.

The strange thing is, I don't see a lot of posts claiming the opposite. Some comments, sure, but I think most people will agree that there are far, far more posts labelling liberalism as being in some way stupid, a mental illness etc than there are posts about conservatism claiming the same superiority.

I don't get this at all - I see no link between political views and intelligence. I've met some brilliant socialists, a couple of brilliant fascists, and everything in between. I have met enough painfully stupid liberals and painfully stupid conservatives that I don't think either side are in too great a position to start claiming a monopoly on smarts.

Isn't claiming 'liberalism is a mental illness' the kind of Catch 22 comment that only an intellectual dwarf could assume?

Or is there a reason that some conservatives believe they are intellectually superior?

Or is there a reason that some conservatives believe they are intellectually superior?

What do you expect from people who believe the world is 6,000 years old and God controls the climate? That science is a "faith" and evolution a lie? People they gave us the Iraq fiasco, the deficit, and that think Canadian oil isn't "foreign". They think "supply and demand" is a wild liberal theory. They think ending the minimum wage will give us "prosperity".

Look at conservative states. The wealthy ones are only wealthy because they dig it out of the ground. They create nothing. They don't know anything. For the last 30 years, every one of their policies have hurt the country.

These people are so fucking stupid, they truly believe that white conservative Confederates fought to end slavery.

These people are so fucking ignorant, they believe the credit downgrade, voter suppression, the block to investigating BP after the oil spill, and the government shutdown was the fault of Democrats even though their own leaders tell us they did it and it worked.

Then entire world laughs at them. Even though their party is 90% white, they believe they are the party of diversity.

You simply can't get anymore ignorant than right wing Republicans. When they said they didn't want their children to be taught critical thinking skills, they needn't have worried. That's something they will never learn from other Republicans.

I may not be intellectually superior to a lot of educated liberals, but I am smarter than all liberals combined just because they support obama and his failed policies.

There is a huge difference between an educated person ( book smart) and who is intelligent.
The former can regurgitate information which was fed to them with resounding ease. They can take examinations and receive high grades. The real world exposes those who can think, improvise overcome and adapt and those who if their books and studies are removed, could not think their way out of a wet paper bag if they were spotted the open end.

There is a huge difference between an educated person ( book smart) and who is intelligent.
The former can regurgitate information which was fed to them with resounding ease. They can take examinations and receive high grades. The real world exposes those who can think, improvise overcome and adapt and those who if their books and studies are removed, could not think their way out of a wet paper bag if they were spotted the open end.

This is that same old ignorant canard that educated people are the stupid ones. They have no common sense and can't tie their shoes because they are "over educated" as if you could ever learn too much. The problem with Republicans is they can't learn at all.

Becoming really good at anything takes time and lot's of effort. Republicans have been taught to destroy, but not how to build. Go ahead. Try to get Republicans to name their policies that will actually help the majority of Americans. You get either a mixture of "we don't believe in socialism" or truly simplistic phrases without a shred of substance like "make things better".

 

[thereisnospoon]

A vast amount of people in this country has the attitude of give me, give me, give and I want it and I want it now.
An entitlement mentality is a state of mind in which an individual comes to believe that privileges are instead rights.
Lack of personal responsibility. Just as those with an entitlement mentality typically expect others to solve their problems, they also refuse to accept that the problems are of their own making.
Just like the women at McDonalds.
They arrived late after the breakfast served under the hours of......... and expected to still be able to order from the breakfast menu. It was their own fault for not getting there on time.

AGAIN...double down on your anecdotal evidence that supports your dogma...you CAN'T be wrong...

"Entitlement mentality" is a manufactured term used by the people who have brainwashed you...

The term "entitlement" originally referred to aristocrats. Aristocrats had titles, and they thought that they were thereby entitled to various things, particularly the deference of the common people. Everyone else, by contrast, was dependent on the aristocrats. This is conservatism. Yet in the 1990's, conservative rhetors decided that the people who actually claim entitlement are people on welfare. They furthermore created an empirically false association between welfare and dependency. But, as I have mentioned, welfare is precisely a way of eliminating dependency on the aristocracy and the cultural authorities that serve it. I do not recall anyone ever noting this inversion of meaning.

Oh Brother !
Talk about brainwashed

I see your indoctrination is complete. Even the icon of the right, F.A Hayek would dismiss today's social Darwinist conservatives.

"There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, (the certainty of a given minimum of sustenance) should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision."
I agree with this 100%.
The problem we have is our system of social safety nets has mushroomed into a multi trillion dollar hodgepodge of programs for every conceivable condition, syndrome, possibility etc. The fact that almost HALF the US population receives at least some form of public assistance should shame anyone who supports this system of making poverty comfortable into having to hide their face in public.
But no...You people insist it is never enough. Tax more. Tax at a higher rate you say.
None of which is going to m ake anyone less poor or raise them out of poverty.
What these taxpayer funded giveaways accomplish is twofold. One, it creates more opportunity to grow the size of government
Two, provides an endlessly growing source of votes for those who use their positions of power to make sure the goodies are always there.
Social giveaways ( entitlements) have always been about acquiring and retention of political power for democrats.

Social Security and Medicare have not added one dime to our debt. And right wing hacks like Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector has grossly inflated the costs of other programs by including things like sewer and water systems being built as social programs.

Of course, to the right wing mind who loathes the poor it just CAN'T be because liberals believe in helping people. It has to have an ulterior motive, because the right wing mind is devoid of empathy.

What Conservatives Really Want

The central issue in our political life is not being discussed. At stake is the moral basis of American democracy.

The individual issues are all too real: assaults on unions, public employees, women's rights, immigrants, the environment, health care, voting rights, food safety, pensions, prenatal care, science, public broadcasting, and on and on.

Budget deficits are a ruse, as we've seen in Wisconsin, where the governor turned a surplus into a deficit by providing corporate tax breaks, and then used the deficit as a ploy to break the unions, not just in Wisconsin, but seeking to be the first domino in a nationwide conservative movement.

Deficits can be addressed by raising revenue, plugging tax loopholes, putting people to work, and developing the economy long-term in all the ways the president has discussed. But deficits are not what really matters to conservatives.

Conservatives really want to change the basis of American life, to make America run according to the conservative moral worldview in all areas of life.

In the 2008 campaign, candidate Obama accurately described the basis of American democracy: Empathy -- citizens caring for each other, both social and personal responsibility -- acting on that care, and an ethic of excellence. From these, our freedoms and our way of life follow, as does the role of government: to protect and empower everyone equally. Protection includes safety, health, the environment, pensions and empowerment starts with education and infrastructure. No one can be free without these, and without a commitment to care and act on that care by one's fellow citizens.

The conservative worldview rejects all of that.

Conservatives believe in individual responsibility alone, not social responsibility. They don't think government should help its citizens. That is, they don't think citizens should help each other. The part of government they want to cut is not the military (we have 174 bases around the world), not government subsidies to corporations, not the aspect of government that fits their worldview. They want to cut the part that helps people. Why? Because that violates individual responsibility.

But where does that view of individual responsibility alone come from?

The way to understand the conservative moral system is to consider a strict father family. The father is The Decider, the ultimate moral authority in the family. His authority must not be challenged. His job is to protect the family, to support the family (by winning competitions in the marketplace), and to teach his kids right from wrong by disciplining them physically when they do wrong. The use of force is necessary and required. Only then will children develop the internal discipline to become moral beings. And only with such discipline will they be able to prosper. And what of people who are not prosperous? They don't have discipline, and without discipline they cannot be moral, so they deserve their poverty. The good people are hence the prosperous people. Helping others takes away their discipline, and hence makes them both unable to prosper on their own and function morally.

Gee. How wonderful your C&P skills are.
Now how about using YOUR OWN words.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Every day on this board we seem to have threads about 'how stupid are libs?', 'dimbocrats', 'typical liberal stupidity'....you know the drill.

The strange thing is, I don't see a lot of posts claiming the opposite. Some comments, sure, but I think most people will agree that there are far, far more posts labelling liberalism as being in some way stupid, a mental illness etc than there are posts about conservatism claiming the same superiority.

I don't get this at all - I see no link between political views and intelligence. I've met some brilliant socialists, a couple of brilliant fascists, and everything in between. I have met enough painfully stupid liberals and painfully stupid conservatives that I don't think either side are in too great a position to start claiming a monopoly on smarts.

Isn't claiming 'liberalism is a mental illness' the kind of Catch 22 comment that only an intellectual dwarf could assume?

Or is there a reason that some conservatives believe they are intellectually superior?

I have seen a few studies that address this issue and the ones I've read reach the conclusion that people with liberal ideologies are smarter than those at the other end of the political scale. This article here describes one of these studies;

"The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services. ... What's new in Kanazawa's paper is a provocative theory about why intelligence might correlate with liberalism. He argues that smarter people are more willing to espouse "evolutionarily novel" values--that is, values that did not exist in our ancestral environment, including weird ideas about, say, helping genetically unrelated strangers..."

"So are liberals smarter? Kanazawa quotes from two surveys that support the hypothesis that liberals are more intelligent. One is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which is often called Add Health. The other is the General Social Survey (GSS). The Add Health study shows that the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as "very liberal" is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves "very conservative." The Add Health study is huge — more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant."

These studies don't necessarily agree on why this measurable difference exists but it is clear from the ones that I've read that it does.

They not only do not necessarily agree on 'why'... but they also do not offer any actual evidence sustaining their 'feelings'.

What your studies demonstrate is "Relativism" on PARADE!

The studies that psychological, behavioral, or political scientists do are based on accepted statistical formats usually and the ones published in the top journals are peer-reviewed and subject to strict scrutiny. To say that they are based on "feelings" is just nonsense. Of course scientists in the social field have their personal biases just as say, an experimental physicist may be biased toward the existence of the Higgs boson. That doesn't mean bias will influence the experimental results. A scientist won't have much of a career if he is seen as letting bias affect his analysis of data.

And I'm sorry, I can't respond to this, "What your studies demonstrate is "Relativism" on PARADE!". I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say with that statement.

 

[BluesLegend]

Blues Legend is one of our most intelligent posters. Just brilliant. Such original thoughts, too!

I have to do the left's thinking for them, which gets annoying.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Holy shit! Gruber is the new USMB b nutter super hero! The funny thing is that if one is intelligent enough to pull back the layers of what he actually said......one isn't insulted by it.

Idiots like to think that his primary point was that liberal voters are stupid. Well...liberal voters didn't need to be convinced of the benefits of universal health care and liberal voters don't get freaked out by paying taxes. He was referring to nutjob idiot cons. The only people who think the dude was talking about them and calling them stupid.....are.....oddly enough.......right.

Well what is it? Four days and because one of your fellow libs has gotten your side busted, you have now thrown him under the bus. it figures. I guess circling the wagons around Gruber after the first two videos was no longer palatable after videos 3, 4 and 5....

The dude is calling YOU too stupid to grasp the importance of universal healthcare. Basically. He was saying that you can't handle the truth. You, like a child, need to be cajoled into doing that which is right. Figure it out.

People,like me don't care if universal health care has upfront costs. We understand that the long term benefits outweigh the costs.

Shit. Maybe if you keep talking about Gruber, you can get some weak assed Democratic politicians to denounce him for you. Idiot.

Universal healthcare? Yer kidding right? Not happening. although it is a fantasy and a cause of spontaneous orgasms in the minds of libs who dream of the day when their medical needs are funded by other people's money.
Here's a reality you will just have to live with. Single payer is NOT going to happen here. Denmark awaits you.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Every day on this board we seem to have threads about 'how stupid are libs?', 'dimbocrats', 'typical liberal stupidity'....you know the drill.

The strange thing is, I don't see a lot of posts claiming the opposite. Some comments, sure, but I think most people will agree that there are far, far more posts labelling liberalism as being in some way stupid, a mental illness etc than there are posts about conservatism claiming the same superiority.

I don't get this at all - I see no link between political views and intelligence. I've met some brilliant socialists, a couple of brilliant fascists, and everything in between. I have met enough painfully stupid liberals and painfully stupid conservatives that I don't think either side are in too great a position to start claiming a monopoly on smarts.

Isn't claiming 'liberalism is a mental illness' the kind of Catch 22 comment that only an intellectual dwarf could assume?

Or is there a reason that some conservatives believe they are intellectually superior?

I have seen a few studies that address this issue and the ones I've read reach the conclusion that people with liberal ideologies are smarter than those at the other end of the political scale. This article here describes one of these studies;

"The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services. ... What's new in Kanazawa's paper is a provocative theory about why intelligence might correlate with liberalism. He argues that smarter people are more willing to espouse "evolutionarily novel" values--that is, values that did not exist in our ancestral environment, including weird ideas about, say, helping genetically unrelated strangers..."

"So are liberals smarter? Kanazawa quotes from two surveys that support the hypothesis that liberals are more intelligent. One is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which is often called Add Health. The other is the General Social Survey (GSS). The Add Health study shows that the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as "very liberal" is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves "very conservative." The Add Health study is huge — more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant."

These studies don't necessarily agree on why this measurable difference exists but it is clear from the ones that I've read that it does.

They not only do not necessarily agree on 'why'... but they also do not offer any actual evidence sustaining their 'feelings'.

What your studies demonstrate is "Relativism" on PARADE!

The studies that psychological, behavioral, or political scientists do are based on accepted statistical formats usually and the ones published in the top journals are peer-reviewed and subject to strict scrutiny. To say that they are based on "feelings" is just nonsense. Of course scientists in the social field have their personal biases just as say, an experimental physicist may be biased toward the existence of the Higgs boson. That doesn't mean bias will influence the experimental results. A scientist won't have much of a career if he is seen as letting bias affect his analysis of data.

And I'm sorry, I can't respond to this, "What your studies demonstrate is "Relativism" on PARADE!". I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say with that statement.

ROFLMNAO!

Now THAT is just ADORABLE!

 

[thereisnospoon]

Every day on this board we seem to have threads about 'how stupid are libs?', 'dimbocrats', 'typical liberal stupidity'....you know the drill.

The strange thing is, I don't see a lot of posts claiming the opposite. Some comments, sure, but I think most people will agree that there are far, far more posts labelling liberalism as being in some way stupid, a mental illness etc than there are posts about conservatism claiming the same superiority.

I don't get this at all - I see no link between political views and intelligence. I've met some brilliant socialists, a couple of brilliant fascists, and everything in between. I have met enough painfully stupid liberals and painfully stupid conservatives that I don't think either side are in too great a position to start claiming a monopoly on smarts.

Isn't claiming 'liberalism is a mental illness' the kind of Catch 22 comment that only an intellectual dwarf could assume?

Or is there a reason that some conservatives believe they are intellectually superior?

I have seen a few studies that address this issue and the ones I've read reach the conclusion that people with liberal ideologies are smarter than those at the other end of the political scale. This article here describes one of these studies;

"The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services. ... What's new in Kanazawa's paper is a provocative theory about why intelligence might correlate with liberalism. He argues that smarter people are more willing to espouse "evolutionarily novel" values--that is, values that did not exist in our ancestral environment, including weird ideas about, say, helping genetically unrelated strangers..."

"So are liberals smarter? Kanazawa quotes from two surveys that support the hypothesis that liberals are more intelligent. One is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which is often called Add Health. The other is the General Social Survey (GSS). The Add Health study shows that the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as "very liberal" is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves "very conservative." The Add Health study is huge — more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant."

These studies don't necessarily agree on why this measurable difference exists but it is clear from the ones that I've read that it does.

They not only do not necessarily agree on 'why'... but they also do not offer any actual evidence sustaining their 'feelings'.

What your studies demonstrate is "Relativism" on PARADE!

The studies that psychological, behavioral, or political scientists do are based on accepted statistical formats usually and the ones published in the top journals are peer-reviewed and subject to strict scrutiny. To say that they are based on "feelings" is just nonsense. Of course scientists in the social field have their personal biases just as say, an experimental physicist may be biased toward the existence of the Higgs boson. That doesn't mean bias will influence the experimental results. A scientist won't have much of a career if he is seen as letting bias affect his analysis of data.

And I'm sorry, I can't respond to this, "What your studies demonstrate is "Relativism" on PARADE!". I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say with that statement.

Your post isn't a mish mosh of political double speak? Please.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And for those keeping score... this thread is a demonstration of Americans being inherently more intelligent, than are the intellectually less fortunate, who comprise the Ideological Left.

The simple, but incontrovertible FACT is, one can't be 'intelligent' and an adherent to "Left-think"... just as one cannot be morally sound and an adherent of Left-think.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Authoritative parenting and authoritarian parenting are two different things.

And they in concert with each other work well.
Like my Mom used to say...This is not a democracy. This is a benevolent dictatorship.
Our parents were not our friends. They were our parents. The boss. What they said went. No questions asked.
Disobey and pay the consequences for your actions. Do well and receive the just rewards.Carrot and stick.

Yup.

Of course, working in concert is not currently allowed by either silly, narcissistic "side".

No surprise the family is so dysfunctional.

.

Bullshit.

Bullshit what?.....Explain yourself.

Only one party is opposed to working in concert. That's clear to anyone who observes Washington objectively.

Admitting democrats refuse to work with the GOP when the Dems are in the majority is a step in the right direction.
Those 300 pieces of legislation sitting on Harry Reid's desk are a glaring example.
Funny how it was when the Dems were in the minority they screamed "bipartisanship"....When they controlled both houses of Congress it was "fuck you".

 

[thereisnospoon]

The individual issues are all too real: assaults on unions, public employees, women's rights, immigrants, the environment, health care, voting rights, food safety, pensions, prenatal care, science, public broadcasting, and on and on.

Unions are not under attack, they're archaic and counter-productive.

Public employees are not under attack, management of public employees which fails to hold them accountable, is rightly criticized, due to its destructive nature... see: Unions are archaic.

No one is attacking women's rights.... you're likely trying to argue that a right exists to murder another due to one's behavior having conceived the other, thus demanding a right to murder another, for whom you're solely responsible, as a means to avoid bearing responsibility for one's actions.

No one is attacking immigrants... you're likely trying to conflate legal immigration with the destructive ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. It's illegal for a host of sound reasons.

No one is advocating for destruction of the environment.

The only people known to have harmed healthcare in the US are those who are responsible for using DECEIT AND FRAUD as a means to INFLUENCE THE STUPID.

No one is contesting voter's rights... you're likely confusing voter's rights with the voter's responsibility to identify themselves through the use of a credible ID.

And so on... with each and every one of the other issues you noted.

"Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

LOL...you say unions are not under attack...then you attack unions.

Public employee are under attack as are unions...see Wisconsin and teachers

You hide behind 'legal' on immigration, then totally disregard the law on abortion.

Immigrants are being attacked...see Arizona S.B 1070 racial profiling law written by a white supremacist Republican.

The environment is being attacked...see US House bill H.R. 2250, a dangerous bill that allows mercury and other toxic air pollution to pour freely from thousands of the nation's worst air polluters. H.R. 2250 exempts industrial boilers (the on-site power plants at major industrial plants) and industrial waste incinerators from the Clean Air Act's pollution control requirements. It encourages companies to burn tires, plastics, used chemicals, spent solvents and other industrial wastes without doing anything to control the resulting toxic air pollution.

The deceit in our health care system is Wall Street investors who have created real death panels by punishing any insurance corporation that spends too much of premiums on treatments. And hospitals and doctors who rip off taxpayers.

Voter suppression by Republicans goes way beyond voter ID. It is about making voting a day long gauntlet with long lines and not enough polling places.


"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru and co-author of the GOP's 'Contract with America'

You consider the situation in Wisconsin as an "attack" only because it upset the decades existing apple cart that the democrats and the union bosses set up to help each other.
The dems wrote laws to protect the unions as long as the unions promised their undying support of union friendly democrats. The unions collect dues and funnel them into union friendly campaign coffers. Money laundering. Meanwhile wages increased and benefits packages more lucrative. The end result was someone had to pay. The state was hitting up property owners with ever increasing taxes. The union bosses are the ones that ruined their own deal with their greed.
Of course the rhetoric from the union bosses and the rank and file became absurd.
"we don't like you scrutinizing us....So you must hate teachers".....We don't want anyone screwing with our benefits. You hate workers:"
Democrat legislators outnumbered by republicans in both Wisconsin Houses, actually went so far as to run and hide outside the State boundaries so there could be no voting on bills. That's absurd.
Anyway. In civil service states such as New Jersey and New York where taxes have reached stratospheric levels, public employee wages and benefits are being closely examined for cuts. And it's about time. In NJ it got so bad that property taxes some times were increased as much as 20% in a single year.
And when tax caps were passed by democrat majority State assembly and Senate houses in NJ, who was the loudest bunch to protest? The public employees and the unions that represent them....
And in NY Democrat Governor Andrew Cuomo did the unthinkable and went against the wishes of public worker union bosses.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The individual issues are all too real: assaults on unions, public employees, women's rights, immigrants, the environment, health care, voting rights, food safety, pensions, prenatal care, science, public broadcasting, and on and on.

Unions are not under attack, they're archaic and counter-productive.

Public employees are not under attack, management of public employees which fails to hold them accountable, is rightly criticized, due to its destructive nature... see: Unions are archaic.

No one is attacking women's rights.... you're likely trying to argue that a right exists to murder another due to one's behavior having conceived the other, thus demanding a right to murder another, for whom you're solely responsible, as a means to avoid bearing responsibility for one's actions.

No one is attacking immigrants... you're likely trying to conflate legal immigration with the destructive ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. It's illegal for a host of sound reasons.

No one is advocating for destruction of the environment.

The only people known to have harmed healthcare in the US are those who are responsible for using DECEIT AND FRAUD as a means to INFLUENCE THE STUPID.

No one is contesting voter's rights... you're likely confusing voter's rights with the voter's responsibility to identify themselves through the use of a credible ID.

And so on... with each and every one of the other issues you noted.

"Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

LOL...you say unions are not under attack...then you attack unions.

Public employee are under attack as are unions...see Wisconsin and teachers

You hide behind 'legal' on immigration, then totally disregard the law on abortion.

Immigrants are being attacked...see Arizona S.B 1070 racial profiling law written by a white supremacist Republican.

The environment is being attacked...see US House bill H.R. 2250, a dangerous bill that allows mercury and other toxic air pollution to pour freely from thousands of the nation's worst air polluters. H.R. 2250 exempts industrial boilers (the on-site power plants at major industrial plants) and industrial waste incinerators from the Clean Air Act's pollution control requirements. It encourages companies to burn tires, plastics, used chemicals, spent solvents and other industrial wastes without doing anything to control the resulting toxic air pollution.

The deceit in our health care system is Wall Street investors who have created real death panels by punishing any insurance corporation that spends too much of premiums on treatments. And hospitals and doctors who rip off taxpayers.

Voter suppression by Republicans goes way beyond voter ID. It is about making voting a day long gauntlet with long lines and not enough polling places.


"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru and co-author of the GOP's 'Contract with America'

From Page 2 of HR -2250
For each regulation the EPA promulgates, H.R. 2250 requires the EPA Administrator to establish
compliance standards and allow at least five years for an effective date and take into account:
♦ the costs of achieving emissions reductions;
♦ any non-air quality health and environmental impact and energy requirements of the
standards and requirements;
♦ the feasibility of implementing the standards and requirements, including the time needed
to obtain necessary permit approvals and procure, install, and test control equipment;
♦ the availability of equipment, suppliers, and labor, given the requirements of the
regulation and other proposed or finalized regulations of the Environmental Protection
Agency; and
♦ potential net employment impacts.
Finally, the bill requires emissions standards to be consistent with standards for all other air
pollutants regulated by the rule for a source category. The administrator is also required to take
into account variability in actual source performance, source design, fuels, inputs, controls, ability
to measure the pollutant emissions, and operating conditions.
Courtesy ....house.gov
So your alarmist rhetoric has been dumped upon like that corner of the dog park.
All this law does is place checks on the EPA. Checks that should be in place anyway.
It was Obama and his obsession with ramming through his "green" crap who cut the EPA loose from Congressional oversight.
Something he did by executive fiat.
On abortion.....Ok so where are laws permitting abortion being violated? And name them? As far as I know, due to Roe, abortion is the law of the land. It is permitted. However, there is nothing in that SCOTUS opinion that mandates states cannot regulate the activity as they see fit.
Have you any evidence to present which supports your allegation that only republicans are committing voter suppression and making voting a day long gauntlet with long lines and not enough polling places?.....So where is this? Where is this being done?
Oh and are you implying that republican voters have more staying power that which allows them to wait on long lines to vote while democrat voters have no such endurance and find that they have better things to do than wait on line to vote?
Or are you just being ridiculous and making up this crap?
Now, go get the evidence. Form at least two independent sources. Links to blogs or opinion pieces will be dismissed.

 

[Bfgrn]

The individual issues are all too real: assaults on unions, public employees, women's rights, immigrants, the environment, health care, voting rights, food safety, pensions, prenatal care, science, public broadcasting, and on and on.

Unions are not under attack, they're archaic and counter-productive.

Public employees are not under attack, management of public employees which fails to hold them accountable, is rightly criticized, due to its destructive nature... see: Unions are archaic.

No one is attacking women's rights.... you're likely trying to argue that a right exists to murder another due to one's behavior having conceived the other, thus demanding a right to murder another, for whom you're solely responsible, as a means to avoid bearing responsibility for one's actions.

No one is attacking immigrants... you're likely trying to conflate legal immigration with the destructive ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. It's illegal for a host of sound reasons.

No one is advocating for destruction of the environment.

The only people known to have harmed healthcare in the US are those who are responsible for using DECEIT AND FRAUD as a means to INFLUENCE THE STUPID.

No one is contesting voter's rights... you're likely confusing voter's rights with the voter's responsibility to identify themselves through the use of a credible ID.

And so on... with each and every one of the other issues you noted.

"Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

LOL...you say unions are not under attack...then you attack unions.

False. I noted that Unions are archaic, and counter-productive. And a Union does not equate to Labor, it equates to unaccountable labor which costs too much.

Public employee are under attack as are unions...see Wisconsin and teachers

You're conflating people who work for the public sector, which is to say "The Gubment" and those who are employed by the government, through public sector unions.

People are already represented through their Legislatures... there is no purpose for a union, beyond forcing the cost of public sector labor, beyond the means of the public to sustain the costs for such. Again... archaic and counter-productive.

You hide behind 'legal' on immigration, then totally disregard the law on abortion.

I don't hide behind anything. The laws regarding immigration rest upon objective reasoning and as such are there to defend the nation from infiltration of those harboring loyalties to Foreign Ideas, which are hostile to the Principles that define and otherwise sustain America. You know... people like YOU!

Laws enabling women to murder the children they conceive through their poor choices are set upon subjective reasoning, serve only to enable poor choices, thus result in the increase in the instances of individuals making poor choices and subsequently undermine the PURPOSE OF LAW, which is the service of JUSTICE.

Immigrants are being attacked...see Arizona S.B 1070 racial profiling law written by a white supremacist Republican.

You're a liar and as is SO OFTEN the case, an imbecile.

The environment is being attacked...

Yep... You're an imbecile. Just because someone recognizes that you idiots are using the law as a means to acquire power and is taking measures to reduce your power by making it harder for you to do so, does NOT mean that they're attacking the environment.

Again, you're an imbecile.

The deceit in our health care system is Wall Street investors who have created real death panels by punishing any insurance corporation that spends too much of premiums on treatments. And hospitals and doctors who rip off taxpayers.

Death panels? Or contracts which clearly specify the terms of coverage, and the specific cost, in terms of premiums for the servicing of those specific terms?

This in contrast to the EMPTY PROMISES of the Left 'that EVERYONE will be insured' despite the certainty that not everyone will be insured and that by JUST BEING A LEFTIST PLAN, that more people will be injured and die prematurely as a result of their having crippled a system which was the epitome of healthcare ON THE PLANET, before they started 'fixing' it.

Voter suppression by Republicans

There's no such thing.

"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru and co-author of the GOP's 'Contract with America'

Labor is not an entity... you're speaking of Norquists promise to shut down the means of the Left to USE 'LABOR'
as a means to undermine the security of the United States.

So... that brings me to noting and accepting your above concessions.

EPIC fail...calling me an imbecile is not an argument, it is a concession...

Game, set, match Bfgrn...

 

[Bfgrn]

Walking back the claim already, huh? Nice.

No....Bigfrn would simply use Google to find the answers.
If you cannot handle that, tough shit.

He wouldn't need google to answer civics questions. Why are you so mistrusting?

Oh Ok... Here's one for ya:

From where do Human Rights come and by what means are such sustained?

Knock yourselves out...

(Enjoy kids... )

Human rights, going back to the Magna Carta are the domain of government with the support of the citizenry.

So you're saying that Human Rights come from Government? And you are assuring us that this is true, because the Magna Carta said so... ?

ROFLMNAO!

Well folks, as I noted earlier, sound reasoning NEVER requires validation, but it is always nice where one's opponents provides for such.

FTR: The Magna Carta, in effect, recognized that God is the supreme authority and that the King is NOT God... .

Therefore, according to the Magna Carta: Human Rights... come from God and that the only true purpose of government is to defend the innocent from those who would usurp God's will, thus preclude humanity from exercising the gifts given to them, by God.

Again, EPIC fail. God does not interfere with the free will of man. He only has the final say. NO human rights are possible without government enforcing those rights. NONE, without government, got it?

 

[Listening]

No....Bigfrn would simply use Google to find the answers.
If you cannot handle that, tough shit.

He wouldn't need google to answer civics questions. Why are you so mistrusting?

Oh Ok... Here's one for ya:

From where do Human Rights come and by what means are such sustained?

Knock yourselves out...

(Enjoy kids... )

Human rights, going back to the Magna Carta are the domain of government with the support of the citizenry.

So you're saying that Human Rights come from Government? And you are assuring us that this is true, because the Magna Carta said so... ?

ROFLMNAO!

Well folks, as I noted earlier, sound reasoning NEVER requires validation, but it is always nice where one's opponents provides for such.

FTR: The Magna Carta, in effect, recognized that God is the supreme authority and that the King is NOT God... .

Therefore, according to the Magna Carta: Human Rights... come from God and that the only true purpose of government is to defend the innocent from those who would usurp God's will, thus preclude humanity from exercising the gifts given to them, by God.

Again, EPIC fail. God does not interfere with the free will of man. He only has the final say. NO human rights are possible without government enforcing those rights. NONE, without government, got it?

Garbage.

Human right don't exist.

Natural rights do.

And people decide to band together and form governments to protect those rights in a meaningful way.

Otherwise, it is up to each of us to enforce them and that gets ugly very fast.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again, EPIC fail. God does not interfere with the free will of man. He only has the final say. NO human rights are possible without government enforcing those rights. NONE, without government, got it?

Well, sound reasoning never requires validation, but it is always nice when validation comes along.

The above contribution, to which I am responding here, is a CLASSIC demonstration of why There are NO LEFTIST AMERICANS.

Nature precludes the means of one to adhere to the antithesis, which claiming adherence to the thesis. Simply can't be done.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

EPIC fail...calling me an imbecile is not an argument

True, it's a statement of fact.

 

[Bfgrn]

The individual issues are all too real: assaults on unions, public employees, women's rights, immigrants, the environment, health care, voting rights, food safety, pensions, prenatal care, science, public broadcasting, and on and on.

Unions are not under attack, they're archaic and counter-productive.

Public employees are not under attack, management of public employees which fails to hold them accountable, is rightly criticized, due to its destructive nature... see: Unions are archaic.

No one is attacking women's rights.... you're likely trying to argue that a right exists to murder another due to one's behavior having conceived the other, thus demanding a right to murder another, for whom you're solely responsible, as a means to avoid bearing responsibility for one's actions.

No one is attacking immigrants... you're likely trying to conflate legal immigration with the destructive ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. It's illegal for a host of sound reasons.

No one is advocating for destruction of the environment.

The only people known to have harmed healthcare in the US are those who are responsible for using DECEIT AND FRAUD as a means to INFLUENCE THE STUPID.

No one is contesting voter's rights... you're likely confusing voter's rights with the voter's responsibility to identify themselves through the use of a credible ID.

And so on... with each and every one of the other issues you noted.

"Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

LOL...you say unions are not under attack...then you attack unions.

Public employee are under attack as are unions...see Wisconsin and teachers

You hide behind 'legal' on immigration, then totally disregard the law on abortion.

Immigrants are being attacked...see Arizona S.B 1070 racial profiling law written by a white supremacist Republican.

The environment is being attacked...see US House bill H.R. 2250, a dangerous bill that allows mercury and other toxic air pollution to pour freely from thousands of the nation's worst air polluters. H.R. 2250 exempts industrial boilers (the on-site power plants at major industrial plants) and industrial waste incinerators from the Clean Air Act's pollution control requirements. It encourages companies to burn tires, plastics, used chemicals, spent solvents and other industrial wastes without doing anything to control the resulting toxic air pollution.

The deceit in our health care system is Wall Street investors who have created real death panels by punishing any insurance corporation that spends too much of premiums on treatments. And hospitals and doctors who rip off taxpayers.

Voter suppression by Republicans goes way beyond voter ID. It is about making voting a day long gauntlet with long lines and not enough polling places.


"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru and co-author of the GOP's 'Contract with America'

You consider the situation in Wisconsin as an "attack" only because it upset the decades existing apple cart that the democrats and the union bosses set up to help each other.
The dems wrote laws to protect the unions as long as the unions promised their undying support of union friendly democrats. The unions collect dues and funnel them into union friendly campaign coffers. Money laundering. Meanwhile wages increased and benefits packages more lucrative. The end result was someone had to pay. The state was hitting up property owners with ever increasing taxes. The union bosses are the ones that ruined their own deal with their greed.
Of course the rhetoric from the union bosses and the rank and file became absurd.
"we don't like you scrutinizing us....So you must hate teachers".....We don't want anyone screwing with our benefits. You hate workers:"
Democrat legislators outnumbered by republicans in both Wisconsin Houses, actually went so far as to run and hide outside the State boundaries so there could be no voting on bills. That's absurd.
Anyway. In civil service states such as New Jersey and New York where taxes have reached stratospheric levels, public employee wages and benefits are being closely examined for cuts. And it's about time. In NJ it got so bad that property taxes some times were increased as much as 20% in a single year.
And when tax caps were passed by democrat majority State assembly and Senate houses in NJ, who was the loudest bunch to protest? The public employees and the unions that represent them....
And in NY Democrat Governor Andrew Cuomo did the unthinkable and went against the wishes of public worker union bosses.

It was an attack in Wisconsin against teachers. BUT, Walker exempted unions who supported his campaign.

All that power by unions and Democrats created LOWER wages for teacher compared to private sector jobs.

Are Public Employees Overpaid?


Walker has said that the labor changes are necessary because Wisconsin’s local and state employees haven’t made the same sacrifices during the Great Recession as private sector workers.

Walker glossed over the fact that state employees had eight unpaid furlough days in 2009 and 2010, which saved the state $121 million, and their wages have been flat for years.

He also forgot to mention that when he was Milwaukee County executive, members of the largest county employee union took 26 unpaid furlough days in 2010, or one unpaid day off for every two-week pay period—a 10% pay cut. They’ll have 26 unpaid days off this year, too, as a result of Walker’s final county budget. (The employees at the Shepherd Express, a private sector company, did not have any wage decreases or forced furlough days.)

So is Walker correct when he says that public employees are making more than their counterparts in the private sector?

The short answer is no, according to a new study by the national nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute (EPI), which found that Wisconsin’s state and local employees earn 4.8% less per hour in total compensation than their peers in the private sector. That number jumps to 25% for college-educated employees. EPI found that, on average, Wisconsin’s public employees with a bachelor’s degree earn $61,668 in total compensation; their peers working for private employers earn $82,134 in wages and benefits.

And although Gov. Scott Walker is earning $144,423 as a public sector employee with “some college” education, his pay package is not typical. Public sector employees who attended college but did not earn a diploma earn an average $46,707 in wages and benefits, while those in the private sector earn 7% more, or $50,324, EPI found.

 

[Listening]

Blather and bullshit.

There seem to be studies out there ....a host of them that make both sides of the argument.

Who can tell what is true and what is not.

 

[MrDVS1]

Every day on this board we seem to have threads about 'how stupid are libs?', 'dimbocrats', 'typical liberal stupidity'....you know the drill.

The strange thing is, I don't see a lot of posts claiming the opposite. Some comments, sure, but I think most people will agree that there are far, far more posts labelling liberalism as being in some way stupid, a mental illness etc than there are posts about conservatism claiming the same superiority.

I don't get this at all - I see no link between political views and intelligence. I've met some brilliant socialists, a couple of brilliant fascists, and everything in between. I have met enough painfully stupid liberals and painfully stupid conservatives that I don't think either side are in too great a position to start claiming a monopoly on smarts.

Isn't claiming 'liberalism is a mental illness' the kind of Catch 22 comment that only an intellectual dwarf could assume?

Or is there a reason that some conservatives believe they are intellectually superior?

I bet if you looked at the religious beliefs of stupid liberals and stupid conservatives you would find the common denominator.

 

[Bfgrn]

Again, EPIC fail. God does not interfere with the free will of man. He only has the final say. NO human rights are possible without government enforcing those rights. NONE, without government, got it?

Well, sound reasoning never requires validation, but it is always nice when validation comes along.

The above contribution, to which I am responding here, is a CLASSIC demonstration of why There are NO LEFTIST AMERICANS.

Nature precludes the means of one to adhere to the antithesis, which claiming adherence to the thesis. Simply can't be done.

You are exhibiting ZERO reasoning. Nature has nothing to do with human rights, and neither does God. How did God do protecting human rights in Nazi Germany? How is He doing in Iraq and Syria now??