Kagy, you need to stop posting during your nicotine and alcohol-withdrawal fits. And please wipe the drool off of your keyboard. I wouldn't want you to start an electrical fire! And ZRB, quit stirring up the hornet's nest! ------------------ "Blues is a Healer" --John Lee Hooker [This message has been edited by RocketMan Tex (edited February 20, 2001).]
Whewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. ZRB, apology accepted and I hope you will likewise accept mine. I probably should operate from the assumption that people are kidding. I wasn't trying to turn your argument around, just to point out what Jeff so deftly got across-- those kind of generalizations are what make politics such a frustrating endeavor. I was pretty angry. Anyway, here is my actual take on the subject: Neither side, conservative or liberal, can lay any real claim to the intellectual high ground. Both do so in different ways; a lot of liberal claims are based on the fact that "research and studies prove" their point of view, while a lot of conservative claims are backed by the mantra "if you just approach the issue logically". Neither side will admit to being governed by emotion, but I see an awful lot of it(specifically a lot of the seven deadly sins) behind some of each side's arguments. Looking at the conservative side, for instance, I would say a lot of the pro-death penalty argument is based in emotion. How often have you heard a conservative argue in favor of the death penalty without them using the "What if the victim was your spouse/mother/friend" question? That's an appeal to emotion rather than logic. The main reason I think both sides generally believe they're smarter, aside from the obvious fact that they think they're right and thus must be smarter, is simple. They find, focus on, and are mortified by the five percent of complete idiots on the other side. These idiots are the people that are unwilling to abandon mainstream politics and thus vote Democratic or Republican in the elections, but who hold exceptionally radical views that neither party's majority would tolerate. Again, on the right, how welcome do you really think David Duke was? Most Republicans vociferously repudiated Duke when he announced his run for the House of Representatives. Yet the GOP was held culpable for Duke's twisted and disgusting beliefs. Many on the left would, instead of applauding the repudiation and commiserating with Republicans on their misfortune at being saddled with a loser like Duke, chalk that up to general stupidity on the right-- "Can you believe these idiots think that way about blacks?". One of the best examples I can think of is the debate over flag-burning. Democrats tend to oppose any attempt to make flag-burning illegal (I agree with them on this one). Republicans wants a constitutional amendment outlawing the desecration of a national symbol. OK. Now what happens when this issue resurfaces on 'Hannity and Colmes' in a month? Hannity attacks the Democrat who's been invited to defend our right to free speech-- and he does so by asking him/her to defend the anti-American quotes made by the mouth-breathing idiots who burn the flag. Guilt (of stupidity) by association. The unspoken message? Folks, look how dumb the left is. This is what they all think! They think America's evil-- just listen to this quote from the Lenin Youth member who was burning the flag! And that night, a lot of people click off their TV sets thinking not that they have honest disagreements with the opposing political party but that they're in diametrical opposition to people who are intellectually inferior. OK, this was long. Apologies. Hope it made sense. ------------------ I take her to the aquarium, she says shark, I take her to the planetarium, she says dark. [This message has been edited by BrianKagy (edited February 20, 2001).]
Huh? Im conservative. Could you please say that slower? ------------------ its all good and fun till someone gets hurt ... then its absolutely hilarious!
ZRB: My bad. Sorry about that! BK: Really good stuff. I think that the word "myopic" fits fairly often when it comes to the far ANYTHING. One thing I might change about your assertion is that liberals use studies and research as a way to back claims. I think Democrats might but not as many liberals that I know. I tend to find that Liberals place a lot of very idealistic terms on what they want - justice, compassion, fairness, etc. Those emotions tend to drive liberals and how they deal with issues. I think using studies and research is the way Liberals prove their points or win over their opposition. I find myself often in the position of trying to balance those emotions with logic. I have always been raised to follow logic as opposed to emotion. It is not the best way to handle relationships, let me tell you!!! Sometimes, I have to forgo logic or emotion to come to grips on an issue. I agree that the FAR left or right really tend to create problems for the rest of us not just because of who they are but because they are so incredibly vocal about it. As a result, Americans tend to believe, as you put it, that we are VERY different from one another which just isn't true. What is ironic is that the logic of the right and the research on the left almost always fail miserably the further left or right you go. In fact, the further right you get, the less logical and the further left, the less studied. I'm glad you posted this, BK. I was getting ready to email you when I read it! ------------------ "You know what they say about the music business. Here today, gone TODAY! - Chris Rock at the MTV Music Video Awards
How can ya'll so easily call yourself one or the other? Do you realy agree with all of the right or left precepts? I am conservative when it comes to government spending and somewhat right on defense, but liberal with the environment and a qualified but still distinctly left with low-income entitlement programs (i.e., no 'handouts' [unless really devestating circumstances], but 'hand-ups' like especially strong support of low-income school, college, healthcare, community, etc.). ------------------ Cohen
