Why Conservative Is Simply Better....

[PoliticalChic]

Interesting, except the current Republican party is not a true Conservative party.

The current Republican party is reactionary with a Neo Conservative idea of spreading Democracy by war which isn't in sync with what Conservatism is about.

A matter of opinion.

What's sure, however, is that the current Democratic Party is the true Progressive party, and all that the modern definition entails. The masks came off when Al Gore lost the 2000 election, and the faces tattooed when Kerry matched that performance 2004.

You're wasting my time trying to change the subject to Liberalism.The Op has made the assertion that Conservatism is better for the individual and for society, the problem of course is that the Republican Party does not meet the standards of Conservatism. Do you have any idea when they will meet that standard?

The nation was designed to espouse classical liberal views, based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

In reality, there are only two choices, Republican or Democrat.

Neither is perfect....but....

Which is closer to the classical liberal view?

another cut and paste troll.. .

Another brilliant post by a Liberal moron....

....is that redundant?

 

[Jantje_Smit]

"Coulter is no authority."

Actually, NYLiar....she is exactly that.

She is an authority, and a scholar who has penned a dozen well-documented tomes.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Coulter is no authority."

Actually, NYLiar....she is exactly that.

She is an authority, and a scholar who has penned a dozen well-documented tomes.

And yet another.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Coulter goes on to show that LBJ continually rejected civil rights bills proposed by only Republicans and it was not until 1964, when Johnson finally signed the civil rights act with very little help from his fellow Democrats in Congress. Even after the passage of the civil rights act, Democrats continued to win elections in former segregationist states all the way through the election of George H.W. Bush despite the folklore of the GOP “southern strategy.”
PICKET: Coulter shreds 'southern strategy' myth as GOP successfully runs more blacks in conservative districts - Washington Times


There was no "Southern Strategy."

But....there are low information voters who believe it.....
Raise your paw.

Coulter is no authority.

This tells the story:

The Rockefeller family's billions had once helped finance the Republican Party and the advancement of the interests of African Americans by endowing the N.A.A.C.P. and institutions of higher learning serving black folk. The Party of Lincoln had been the natural home of African Americans until the Great Depression and F.D.R. started to peel them away from the G.O.P.

L.B.J. and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voters Right Act of 1965 sparked a major realignment of the political parties in America. African Americans in the 1960s were now solidly Democratic and the Solid South, which had once been solidly Democratic, began moving towards the new Republican Party procreated by Goldwater, Reagan and ex-Democrats from the former Confederacy like Strom Thurmond.

The first Republicans voted to Congress since Reconstruction from the Deep South started to appear in the 1960s, starting with John Tower in 1961, who was was elected to the U.S. Senate seat once held by then-Vice President Lyndon Johnson in a special election in 1961. Connecticut transplant George Bush, whose father Prescott Bush was a moderate Republican who represented the Nutmeg State in the U.S. Senate, was elected to the House of Representatives from Texas in 1964, reaping political hay from the backlash against civil rights.

The Republican in the South to make the biggest splash in the 1960s was U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, who as the Palmetto State's governor in 1948 broke with Harry Truman over the inclusion of a civil rights plank in the Democratic Party platform (crafted by Hubert H. Humphrey) and ran for president as the head of the "Dixiecrat Party". Thurmond won four Southern states good for 39 votes in the Electoral College. In 1964, he quit the Democratic Party and resigned from the Senate to protest the passage of the Civil Rights Act, which a filibuster by Southern Senators, Democrats all (including Senator Strom, a racist who had fathered a mixed race child with his African American mistress) failed to derail. He subsequently was elected in a special election to his old seat as a Republican.

Goldwater had voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Reagan's political career had been bolstered by his support of Goldwater and his opposition to Fair Housing Laws in the state of California.

Reagan rode the backlash against civil rights to the governor's mansion in Sacramento and later to the White House. Under Reagan, who had launched his 1980 presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, the site of the lynching of three civil rights workers in 1964, the spirit of the hated Abraham Lincoln was exorcised from the G.O.P. he helped create, enabling Southerners to embrace the Grand Old Party they previously had despised as a symbol of the Union's defeat of the Confederacy and is championing of equal rights for black folk during the hated Reconstruction period.

Shorn of Lincoln and a commitment to civil rights (in 1990, Republican President George H.W. Bush would become the first president in history to veto a civil rights act), the realignment of the Deep South with the Republican Party that had started in the 1960s quickened. The process that had begun with a Democrat from the South (L.B.J.) in the White House was completed by the mid-1990s, ironically, under another Democratic President from a former Confederate state, Bill Clinton. (The next Democrat in the White House would be an African American, Barack Obama.)

By 1976, the Grand Old Party that the Rockefeller family had financed was dying. Rockefeller's party had supported African American suffrage (Ike pushed the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 to increase the number of black voters in the Deep South and L.B.J. as Senate Majority Leader got them passed) and had had an equal rights for women plank in the party platform since 1940. (An echo of Teddy Roosevelt's support for women's suffrage in his renegade 1912 Progressive Party presidential bid, the equal rights plank would be torn out of the party platform by Ronald Reagan in 1980.) In the Bicentennial Year of '76, Rockefeller's G.O.P was waning, and a new party more aligned with Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat Party of 1948 was arising, Phoenix-like from the ashes of Lincoln's G.O.P. In 1976, Nelson Rockefeller was no longer welcome, and by 1980, progressive "Rockefeller Republicans" like U.S. Senator Jacob Javits of New York would begin to fall by he wayside, defeated by the likes of conservative 'Alfonse D'Amato'. By the 1980s, the only Rockefeller in elected office, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia (the son or Rocky's brother John D. Rockefeller III), would be a Democrat.

Nelson Rockefeller - Biography - IMDb

"Coulter is no authority."

Actually, NYLiar....she is exactly that.

She is an authority, and a scholar who has penned a dozen well-documented tomes.


If you ever get around to reading......try one.

Puhleeze, Ann Coulter is lazy, her commentary is often unsupported, lacks credibility and is prone to incendiary remarks. She is only popular because she knows which buttons tickle your responses. She is smart and knows how to carve out a niche in punditry but that is all she is, a comment machine that adds fuel to arguments. That is not the definition of a scholar.

Just to disprove the view that you are a typical Liberal windbag....

...note which of her dozen best sellers you've read.

Coulter is a zealous supporter of Donald Trump for president of the United States.

Has she gotten that right?

 

[Timmy]

The GOP, not the party of Lincoln then:

Or now...

The Democrats.....the Party of slavery, segregation, and racism....

Then AND now.

Did u look at the map ? Lincoln won the states that today we call "blue states" .

These are facts .

 

[nuhuh]

"Coulter goes on to show that LBJ continually rejected civil rights bills proposed by only Republicans and it was not until 1964, when Johnson finally signed the civil rights act with very little help from his fellow Democrats in Congress. Even after the passage of the civil rights act, Democrats continued to win elections in former segregationist states all the way through the election of George H.W. Bush despite the folklore of the GOP “southern strategy.”
PICKET: Coulter shreds 'southern strategy' myth as GOP successfully runs more blacks in conservative districts - Washington Times


There was no "Southern Strategy."

But....there are low information voters who believe it.....
Raise your paw.

Coulter is no authority.

This tells the story:

The Rockefeller family's billions had once helped finance the Republican Party and the advancement of the interests of African Americans by endowing the N.A.A.C.P. and institutions of higher learning serving black folk. The Party of Lincoln had been the natural home of African Americans until the Great Depression and F.D.R. started to peel them away from the G.O.P.

L.B.J. and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voters Right Act of 1965 sparked a major realignment of the political parties in America. African Americans in the 1960s were now solidly Democratic and the Solid South, which had once been solidly Democratic, began moving towards the new Republican Party procreated by Goldwater, Reagan and ex-Democrats from the former Confederacy like Strom Thurmond.

The first Republicans voted to Congress since Reconstruction from the Deep South started to appear in the 1960s, starting with John Tower in 1961, who was was elected to the U.S. Senate seat once held by then-Vice President Lyndon Johnson in a special election in 1961. Connecticut transplant George Bush, whose father Prescott Bush was a moderate Republican who represented the Nutmeg State in the U.S. Senate, was elected to the House of Representatives from Texas in 1964, reaping political hay from the backlash against civil rights.

The Republican in the South to make the biggest splash in the 1960s was U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, who as the Palmetto State's governor in 1948 broke with Harry Truman over the inclusion of a civil rights plank in the Democratic Party platform (crafted by Hubert H. Humphrey) and ran for president as the head of the "Dixiecrat Party". Thurmond won four Southern states good for 39 votes in the Electoral College. In 1964, he quit the Democratic Party and resigned from the Senate to protest the passage of the Civil Rights Act, which a filibuster by Southern Senators, Democrats all (including Senator Strom, a racist who had fathered a mixed race child with his African American mistress) failed to derail. He subsequently was elected in a special election to his old seat as a Republican.

Goldwater had voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Reagan's political career had been bolstered by his support of Goldwater and his opposition to Fair Housing Laws in the state of California.

Reagan rode the backlash against civil rights to the governor's mansion in Sacramento and later to the White House. Under Reagan, who had launched his 1980 presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, the site of the lynching of three civil rights workers in 1964, the spirit of the hated Abraham Lincoln was exorcised from the G.O.P. he helped create, enabling Southerners to embrace the Grand Old Party they previously had despised as a symbol of the Union's defeat of the Confederacy and is championing of equal rights for black folk during the hated Reconstruction period.

Shorn of Lincoln and a commitment to civil rights (in 1990, Republican President George H.W. Bush would become the first president in history to veto a civil rights act), the realignment of the Deep South with the Republican Party that had started in the 1960s quickened. The process that had begun with a Democrat from the South (L.B.J.) in the White House was completed by the mid-1990s, ironically, under another Democratic President from a former Confederate state, Bill Clinton. (The next Democrat in the White House would be an African American, Barack Obama.)

By 1976, the Grand Old Party that the Rockefeller family had financed was dying. Rockefeller's party had supported African American suffrage (Ike pushed the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 to increase the number of black voters in the Deep South and L.B.J. as Senate Majority Leader got them passed) and had had an equal rights for women plank in the party platform since 1940. (An echo of Teddy Roosevelt's support for women's suffrage in his renegade 1912 Progressive Party presidential bid, the equal rights plank would be torn out of the party platform by Ronald Reagan in 1980.) In the Bicentennial Year of '76, Rockefeller's G.O.P was waning, and a new party more aligned with Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat Party of 1948 was arising, Phoenix-like from the ashes of Lincoln's G.O.P. In 1976, Nelson Rockefeller was no longer welcome, and by 1980, progressive "Rockefeller Republicans" like U.S. Senator Jacob Javits of New York would begin to fall by he wayside, defeated by the likes of conservative 'Alfonse D'Amato'. By the 1980s, the only Rockefeller in elected office, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia (the son or Rocky's brother John D. Rockefeller III), would be a Democrat.

Nelson Rockefeller - Biography - IMDb

"Coulter is no authority."

Actually, NYLiar....she is exactly that.

She is an authority, and a scholar who has penned a dozen well-documented tomes.


If you ever get around to reading......try one.

Puhleeze, Ann Coulter is lazy, her commentary is often unsupported, lacks credibility and is prone to incendiary remarks. She is only popular because she knows which buttons tickle your responses. She is smart and knows how to carve out a niche in punditry but that is all she is, a comment machine that adds fuel to arguments. That is not the definition of a scholar.

Just to disprove the view that you are a typical Liberal windbag....

...note which of her dozen best sellers you've read.

You're just in denial to the fact that Ann Coulter is a Deep Cover Liberal and the fact that you bought all her books is the funniest thing I'll probably hear all day.

 

[Tax Man]

In less than five minutes, Greg Gutfeld explains why Conservative is simply better for the individual, and for society, than Liberal

And, by investing the five minutes in this vid...you get course credit in Prager University.....




Why the Right is Right - Prager University

Well it is a great way to make money for sure having to pay to see the stuff being sold. I kinda go with the tried and true axiom that as a person gets more education they become more liberal in thought. Frankly I do not care for conservative people and avoided them like the plague when in business. They always complained and tried to get out of paying for services rendered. Then there are the conservative workers. That is a joke. They do not work they just complain and listen to gush pimpballs on the radio.

" I kinda go with the tried and true axiom that as a person gets more education they become more liberal in thought."

Fact:
. The more education one has in the social sciences, the dumber one becomes.

Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ - CNN.com



(CNN) -- Political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.

Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be.

The reasoning is that sexual exclusivity in men, liberalism and atheism all go against what would be expected given humans' evolutionary past. In other words, none of these traits would have benefited our early human ancestors, but higher intelligence may be associated with them.

"The adoption of some evolutionarily novel ideas makes some sense in terms of moving the species forward," said George Washington University leadership professor James Bailey, who was not involved in the study. "It also makes perfect sense that more intelligent people -- people with, sort of, more intellectual firepower -- are likely to be the ones to do that."

Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be "ways to communicate to everyone that you're pretty smart," he said.

The study looked at a large sample from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which began with adolescents in grades 7-12 in the United States during the 1994-95 school year. The participants were interviewed as 18- to 28-year-olds from 2001 to 2002. The study also looked at the General Social Survey, another cross-national data collection source.

Kanazawa did not find that higher or lower intelligence predicted sexual exclusivity in women. This makes sense, because having one partner has always been advantageous to women, even thousands of years ago, meaning exclusivity is not a "new" preference.

For men, on the other hand, sexual exclusivity goes against the grain evolutionarily. With a goal of spreading genes, early men had multiple mates. Since women had to spend nine months being pregnant, and additional years caring for very young children, it made sense for them to want a steady mate to provide them resources.

Religion, the current theory goes, did not help people survive or reproduce necessarily, but goes along the lines of helping people to be paranoid, Kanazawa said. Assuming that, for example, a noise in the distance is a signal of a threat helped early humans to prepare in case of danger.

"It helps life to be paranoid, and because humans are paranoid, they become more religious, and they see the hands of God everywhere," Kanazawa said.

Participants who said they were atheists had an average IQ of 103 in adolescence, while adults who said they were religious averaged 97, the study found. Atheism "allows someone to move forward and speculate on life without any concern for the dogmatic structure of a religion," Bailey said.

"Historically, anything that's new and different can be seen as a threat in terms of the religious beliefs; almost all religious systems are about permanence," he noted.

The study takes the American view of liberal vs. conservative. It defines "liberal" in terms of concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people. It does not look at other factors that play into American political beliefs, such as abortion, gun control and gay rights.

"Liberals are more likely to be concerned about total strangers; conservatives are likely to be concerned with people they associate with," he said.

Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin, the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.

It also makes sense that "conservatism" as a worldview of keeping things stable would be a safer approach than venturing toward the unfamiliar, Bailey said.

Neither Bailey nor Kanazawa identify themselves as liberal; Bailey is conservative and Kanazawa is "a strong libertarian."

Vegetarianism, while not strongly associated with IQ in this study, has been shown to be related to intelligence in previous research, Kanazawa said. This also fits into Bailey's idea that unconventional preferences appeal to people with higher intelligence, and can also be a means of showing superiority.

None of this means that the human species is evolving toward a future where these traits are the default, Kanazawa said.

"More intelligent people don't have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen," he said.
Find this article at:
Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ - CNN.com

 

[PoliticalChic]

In less than five minutes, Greg Gutfeld explains why Conservative is simply better for the individual, and for society, than Liberal

And, by investing the five minutes in this vid...you get course credit in Prager University.....




Why the Right is Right - Prager University

Well it is a great way to make money for sure having to pay to see the stuff being sold. I kinda go with the tried and true axiom that as a person gets more education they become more liberal in thought. Frankly I do not care for conservative people and avoided them like the plague when in business. They always complained and tried to get out of paying for services rendered. Then there are the conservative workers. That is a joke. They do not work they just complain and listen to gush pimpballs on the radio.

" I kinda go with the tried and true axiom that as a person gets more education they become more liberal in thought."

Fact:
. The more education one has in the social sciences, the dumber one becomes.

Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ - CNN.com



(CNN) -- Political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.

Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be.

The reasoning is that sexual exclusivity in men, liberalism and atheism all go against what would be expected given humans' evolutionary past. In other words, none of these traits would have benefited our early human ancestors, but higher intelligence may be associated with them.

"The adoption of some evolutionarily novel ideas makes some sense in terms of moving the species forward," said George Washington University leadership professor James Bailey, who was not involved in the study. "It also makes perfect sense that more intelligent people -- people with, sort of, more intellectual firepower -- are likely to be the ones to do that."

Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be "ways to communicate to everyone that you're pretty smart," he said.

The study looked at a large sample from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which began with adolescents in grades 7-12 in the United States during the 1994-95 school year. The participants were interviewed as 18- to 28-year-olds from 2001 to 2002. The study also looked at the General Social Survey, another cross-national data collection source.

Kanazawa did not find that higher or lower intelligence predicted sexual exclusivity in women. This makes sense, because having one partner has always been advantageous to women, even thousands of years ago, meaning exclusivity is not a "new" preference.

For men, on the other hand, sexual exclusivity goes against the grain evolutionarily. With a goal of spreading genes, early men had multiple mates. Since women had to spend nine months being pregnant, and additional years caring for very young children, it made sense for them to want a steady mate to provide them resources.

Religion, the current theory goes, did not help people survive or reproduce necessarily, but goes along the lines of helping people to be paranoid, Kanazawa said. Assuming that, for example, a noise in the distance is a signal of a threat helped early humans to prepare in case of danger.

"It helps life to be paranoid, and because humans are paranoid, they become more religious, and they see the hands of God everywhere," Kanazawa said.

Participants who said they were atheists had an average IQ of 103 in adolescence, while adults who said they were religious averaged 97, the study found. Atheism "allows someone to move forward and speculate on life without any concern for the dogmatic structure of a religion," Bailey said.

"Historically, anything that's new and different can be seen as a threat in terms of the religious beliefs; almost all religious systems are about permanence," he noted.

The study takes the American view of liberal vs. conservative. It defines "liberal" in terms of concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people. It does not look at other factors that play into American political beliefs, such as abortion, gun control and gay rights.

"Liberals are more likely to be concerned about total strangers; conservatives are likely to be concerned with people they associate with," he said.

Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin, the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.

It also makes sense that "conservatism" as a worldview of keeping things stable would be a safer approach than venturing toward the unfamiliar, Bailey said.

Neither Bailey nor Kanazawa identify themselves as liberal; Bailey is conservative and Kanazawa is "a strong libertarian."

Vegetarianism, while not strongly associated with IQ in this study, has been shown to be related to intelligence in previous research, Kanazawa said. This also fits into Bailey's idea that unconventional preferences appeal to people with higher intelligence, and can also be a means of showing superiority.

None of this means that the human species is evolving toward a future where these traits are the default, Kanazawa said.

"More intelligent people don't have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen," he said.
Find this article at:
Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ - CNN.com

Liberals, based on the failures of their totalitarian predecessors, and the lack of understanding of human nature, are clearly less intelligent than conservatives.

But only a certifiable imbecile would actually believe what you posted.


This is the sort of thing your author has previously written:

"An article posted online on Monday by Psychology Today provoked controversy and cries of racism. The title of evolutionary psychologist Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa’s piece: “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women?”

His argument is that there is a set of data, which shows black women to be “objectively” less attractive than white, Asian or Native American women, but that the same data does not find black men less attractive than men of other races.

...article is most certainly his problem (as well as a problem for Psychology Today and the academic institutions he is affiliated with — the London School of Economics and London’s Birckbeck College)."
“Why are black women less attractive?” asks Psychology Today - Salon.com



So, you imbecile.....stand behind both of his opuses?




Funny, huh?

You posted how stupid conservatives are, and I just proved you to be an imbecile.



On the bright side....you are clearly a reliable Democrat voter.

 

[rdean]

In less than five minutes, Greg Gutfeld explains why Conservative is simply better for the individual, and for society, than Liberal

And, by investing the five minutes in this vid...you get course credit in Prager University.....




Why the Right is Right - Prager University

Prager University

We are not an accredited academic institution.
All our courses are free.

There are no fees, no tuition, books, homework assignments, or grueling midterms
All our courses are five minutes long. That's right, five minutes.

Prager University

On Prager University - You can make a joke, but can you take criticism?

“You give us five minutes, we give you a semester.” That’s the motto of Prager University, and if you think it sounds horrifyingly anti-intellectual, you’re not wrong.

------------------------------------------------

Every so often, a right winger on the USMB comes up with something so ridiculous, so tarded, so stupid, so anti intellectual, you think it must be satire. Or they are drunk. Or brain damaged.

Then I realize, it's probably a case of "all of the above".

 

[PaintMyHouse]

 

[PoliticalChic]

In less than five minutes, Greg Gutfeld explains why Conservative is simply better for the individual, and for society, than Liberal

And, by investing the five minutes in this vid...you get course credit in Prager University.....




Why the Right is Right - Prager University

Prager University

We are not an accredited academic institution.
All our courses are free.

There are no fees, no tuition, books, homework assignments, or grueling midterms
All our courses are five minutes long. That's right, five minutes.

Prager University

On Prager University - You can make a joke, but can you take criticism?

“You give us five minutes, we give you a semester.” That’s the motto of Prager University, and if you think it sounds horrifyingly anti-intellectual, you’re not wrong.

------------------------------------------------

Every so often, a right winger on the USMB comes up with something so ridiculous, so tarded, so stupid, so anti intellectual, you think it must be satire. Or they are drunk. Or brain damaged.

Then I realize, it's probably a case of "all of the above".

Wait.....you imagined (I almost said 'thought') that it was an actual university?????


How often do you feel it necessary to rush in to prove how ignorant your side is???


Does the GOP keep you on retainer......or do the Democrats keep you on a leash?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Image from thesodajerks.com"

So.....what variety of jerk are you?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

 

[PoliticalChic]

Mill is correct about so very many things.....he has the right to be incorrect about a few, such as this.

Now here is a truly meaty quote by David Mamet that puts so many things in the proper focus:

1. "The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposed intransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder."

BTW....are you ready to apologize for the slaughter of over 100 million human beings by totalitarians of your ilk in the last century?

100 million of your fellow human beings.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Mill is correct about so very many things.....he has the right to be incorrect about a few, such as this.

Now here is a truly meaty quote by David Mamet that puts so many things in the proper focus:

1. "The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposed intransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder."

BTW....are you ready to apologize for the slaughter of over 100 million human beings by totalitarians of your ilk in the last century?

100 million of your fellow human beings.

"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history
yelling 'Stop!'."
- William F. Buckley, Jr.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest
exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior
moral justification for selfishness."
- John Kenneth Galbraith

"A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after
they're dead."
- Leo Rosten

"Brains, you know, are suspect in the Republican Party."
- Walter J. Lippmann

Low Effort Thought Leads to Conservatism
http://2012election.procon.org/sour...ught-promotes-political-conservatism-2012.pdf

 

[PoliticalChic]

Mill is correct about so very many things.....he has the right to be incorrect about a few, such as this.

Now here is a truly meaty quote by David Mamet that puts so many things in the proper focus:

1. "The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposed intransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder."

BTW....are you ready to apologize for the slaughter of over 100 million human beings by totalitarians of your ilk in the last century?

100 million of your fellow human beings.

"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history
yelling 'Stop!'."
- William F. Buckley, Jr.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest
exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior
moral justification for selfishness."
- John Kenneth Galbraith

"A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after
they're dead."
- Leo Rosten

"Brains, you know, are suspect in the Republican Party."
- Walter J. Lippmann

I provided a fact.....100 million slaughtered by folks of your persuasion.

Your counter explains the axiom 'talk is cheap.'

 

[PaintMyHouse]

5 Scientific, Peer-Reviewed Studies That Prove Republicans Are Just Stupid

Multiple Scientific Studies Confirm: Extreme Conservatism Linked to Racism, Low I.Q.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Mill is correct about so very many things.....he has the right to be incorrect about a few, such as this.

Now here is a truly meaty quote by David Mamet that puts so many things in the proper focus:

1. "The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposed intransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder."

BTW....are you ready to apologize for the slaughter of over 100 million human beings by totalitarians of your ilk in the last century?

100 million of your fellow human beings.

"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history
yelling 'Stop!'."
- William F. Buckley, Jr.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest
exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior
moral justification for selfishness."
- John Kenneth Galbraith

"A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after
they're dead."
- Leo Rosten

"Brains, you know, are suspect in the Republican Party."
- Walter J. Lippmann

I provided a fact.....100 million slaughtered by folks of your persuasion.

Your counter explains the axiom 'talk is cheap.'

Liberals don't slaughter, but we've been known to throw revolutions and chop off a few heads of royalty here and there.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Mill is correct about so very many things.....he has the right to be incorrect about a few, such as this.

Now here is a truly meaty quote by David Mamet that puts so many things in the proper focus:

1. "The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposed intransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy, all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder."

BTW....are you ready to apologize for the slaughter of over 100 million human beings by totalitarians of your ilk in the last century?

100 million of your fellow human beings.

"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history
yelling 'Stop!'."
- William F. Buckley, Jr.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest
exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior
moral justification for selfishness."
- John Kenneth Galbraith

"A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after
they're dead."
- Leo Rosten

"Brains, you know, are suspect in the Republican Party."
- Walter J. Lippmann

I provided a fact.....100 million slaughtered by folks of your persuasion.

Your counter explains the axiom 'talk is cheap.'

Liberals don't slaughter, but we've been known to throw revolutions and chop off a few heads of royalty here and there.

Liberals are totalitarians, no different in belief from any other....communist, Nazis, fascists:
"...the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’" (Goldberg)


They don't 'slaughter,'....until their power advances beyond the tipping point.

In America, to this point, they are responsible for destroying the Constitution, instituting concentration camps, and for tirelessly fighting against free speech and freedom of religion.

Can mass murder be far behind?

 

[PoliticalChic]

5 Scientific, Peer-Reviewed Studies That Prove Republicans Are Just Stupid

Multiple Scientific Studies Confirm: Extreme Conservatism Linked to Racism, Low I.Q.

And so we have proof of this 'random truth:' The more education one has in the social sciences, the dumber one becomes.