When the neo-conservative movement took over our country, they took personal values and twisted them to use for their own political purpose. "Family Values" no longer meant parents who care for their children and try hard to do what is best for them. That term was stolen by an extremely self-righteous group. If your values include tolerance and respect for other people's choices even if they are different than what you would choose, your are accused of having no values. 

Everything is an either/or proposition with those people. Open debate and compromise are impossible under these conditions. "You are either with us or against us." Sound familiar? Oh, "You don't know what you're talking about" we're condescendingly told. "You don't agree with us, your argument is not valid." It's tiresome and old. What if you are 100% in favor of going after the terrorists but you don't think their plan will work. How does that fit in? Everything is phrased this way. If you don't support MY Medicare reform proposal, you are against Medicare reform. Giving healthcare for ALL Americans is Socialism! We can't afford it! Too many taxes on the rich, Too much corporate taxes. No one up high wants to pay their fair share. No counter proposals, no discussion of ideas, accept what they say or you are the enemy. Intolerance and Oxymoronic statements abound!

GOP leadership in America is entirely to blame for the dumbing down of America, what with right wingnut radio, the illusion of a liberal media,  an illegal Iraq War costing TRILLIONS of dollars and a severe perilously broken economy.  They're already trying to pin America’s woes on liberals. The Democratic Administration hasn't even been in office 60 days! How did America devolve into a near-fascist State? The Conservatives, that's how! I say “near” because I still hold out hope that the corporatism bubble will soon burst and Americans will remember what it means to care about justice, liberty, and individual rights.  

The massive bank failures and government bail-outs which the American people have been witnessing in powerless astonishment is a malignancy which has gnawed at the vitals of our economy since the days of Nixon.  Russ Baker, in Family of Secrets, charts a clear course from the Great Depression  to the latest and greatest calamity of our economic lives today. 

One of the principal causes of bank failures has been the deliberate disintegration of the consumer safety net, put in place by FDR to protect the common man from the predatory instincts of his economic “betters” and impossible GREED!  This corrosion was touted as positive and is known as “deregulation.”  The crumbling of consumer safety accelerated enormously in the Reagan-Bush, Sr. years and finally erupted onto the heads of our citizens under W’s inept rule as the collapse of our housing and banking markets.  During W.’s administration, millions of dollars were lost in arcane instruments of finance known as “derivatives.”  The great majority of Americans – those who were not on the inside- have no idea how these risky schemes operate, but they do realize that they were on the losing end of it all.

The implosion of FDR's safety net was a disaster for our economy and for the hapless taxpayers who paid to bail out the ones who played roulette with their life’s savings.  What was a disaster for the middle class and the poor, however, was a dream come true for the Bushes and their ilk, from Prescott Bush, the father of GHW, to the departed bungler W.

The wealthy, who made their fortunes from deregulation, have hated FDR's New Deal since the days following the Depression, because its provisions benefited those without resources, a hand up, not a hand out.  It is not a coincidence that the New Deal was steadily decimated by Prescott’s son GHW and his grandson W. And here we are today................


JojoWazoo JojoWazoo
46-50, F
19 Responses Mar 14, 2009

SpiceZ So now you admit to wanting to decide who gets to be where just like your vaunted leader Stalin .
And psychobabble by a bunch of liberal lying "professors" does not qualify as a 'scientific study' .

People did not believe the so called refutations of libs about the war because they were bogus, plain and simple.

Wow Sarah Palin supposedly lied about her support for the bridge to nowhere?
I don't know that is true just because some hate filled name calling liberal tells me she did but even if she did that hardly compares to all the lies told by Bush and now being told by Obama like his lies that he improved the economy when he has done nothing but make it worse and everyone sees the truth in their friends and family who are no longer counted in the unemployed numbers because they gave up looking, and their benefits ran out.

Or his lies that he is not raising taxes of the Middle Class when he is taxing them by forcing them into his health scam plan.

And your #1 - 4 apply to you radical liberals not to real conservatives (who by the way are not in any way in support of the Republican establishment who are just a bunch of liberals themselves).

Now make some more personal insults and pretend that = facts and truth, just like you libs always resort to because you have no truth or facts npo matter how many "professors' make them, up.

And if the war was "illegal" then they should have sent a bunch of cops to arrest the Jihadists who started it.
Liberals were never against the war, they were always just against the victims of the terrorists they support, fighting back and staying alive.

Liberals never had any problem with Saddam when he was paying $25,000 to the families of terrorists who blew people up in market places and on buses even though some of those murdered were Americans. But they hated Bush for having America defend themselves even though both houses of Congress approved of it.

And the housing markets and banking were forced into financial ruin by the liberals who under Bush talked down the economy trying to force us into a recession by scaring everyone into believing were were already in one, when we weren't and by ordering the banks to make loans to people they knew could never pay them back then were attacked and punished when it all went wrong.

And some of the most wealthy are the Hollywood libs who get millions per movie per or hundreds of thousands per TV show episode to tell the rest of us that we have no right to get rich.

And lets not forget that incompetent bungler Obama spent 4 times what Bush (who was a liberal anyway) did in a much shorter time period.

Typical liberal hypocrisy.

@theadvantageoflife YOU DON'T BELONG HERE
*********Anyway No point in arguing with is why..*********** Read than stick it where the sun don't shine :P

There's No Arguing With Conservatives ... No, Seriously, Scientific Studies Prove It

A new study out of Yale University confirms what argumentative liberals have long-known: Offering reality-based rebuttals to conservative lies only makes conservatives cling to those lies even harder. In essence, schooling conservatives makes them more stupid. From the Washington Post article on the study, which came out yesterday:

Political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler provided two groups of volunteers with the Bush administration's prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One group was given a refutation -- the comprehensive 2004 Duelfer report that concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded in 2003. Thirty-four percent of conservatives told only about the Bush administration's claims thought Iraq had hidden or destroyed its weapons before the U.S. invasion, but 64 percent of conservatives who heard both claim and refutation thought that Iraq really did have the weapons. The refutation, in other words, made the misinformation worse.
A similar "backfire effect" also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.

In a paper approaching publication, Nyhan, a PhD student at Duke University, and Reifler, at Georgia State University, suggest that Republicans might be especially prone to the backfire effect because conservatives may have more rigid views than liberals: Upon hearing a refutation, conservatives might "argue back" against the refutation in their minds, thereby strengthening their belief in the misinformation. Nyhan and Reifler did not see the same "backfire effect" when liberals were given misinformation and a refutation about the Bush administration's stance on stem cell research.

If you've ever gotten in an argument with your conservative friends (assuming you haven't offered each other a mutual Carville-Matalin-style political ceasefire to preserve the friendship), you've probably seen this "backfire effect" in action. The more you try to tell people that Sarah Palin is lying when she says she was against the Bridge to Nowhere, the more they believe she was telling the truth. The more you try to explain how similar McCain's policies are to Bush's, the more they maintain he's "the original maverick."

The typical mantra of the left is that we don't need to sink to the Republicans' level because we have the truth on our side. But if the other side is utterly immune to the truth -- and indeed, the truth only makes them dig deeper into their fantasy world in which the economy is fundamentally strong and the War in Iraq is a staggering success -- what's a leftie to do?

I ain't got the answers, ace, except to say this: When arguing with conservatives in front of on-the-fence independents, remember that you're not trying to convince the conservative to actually buy into silly notions like facts and reason. You're highlighting the differences between left and right for the outside observer. If the other guy insists on political views that belong only in Disney World's Fantasyland, other folks will realize what's happening.

But if there is no third party, do yourself a favor and save your breath. As the study demonstrates, you're only making matters worse. Consider that aforementioned ceasefire. It is football season, after all. There's plenty of other things to argue about. Go Mizzou!

The right wing authoritarian personality has less to do with a political view than it does with a psychological personality structure.

Yale social psychologist Stanley Milgram defined obedience as the " the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purposes", and called it "the dispositional cement that binds men to systems of authority."
A decade before Milgram produced his findings, which dealt with the conflict arising between obedience to authority and moral conscience, a study on the Authoritarian Personality" was undertaken at UC Berkeley as part of a an effort by leading social scientists to understand how, in a culture of law, order and reason..."a vast majority of people could and actually did tolerate the mass extermination of fellow citizens." That question had some urgency after the horrors of World War II.

During the past half century, this understanding of authoritarianism has been greatly increased through the effforts of social psychologist Bob Altemeyer of the University of Manitoba. Altemeyer found authoritarianism to be consistantly associated with right wing rather then left wing ideology. It refers to people that vertly submit to the established authorities in their lives, who could be of any political stripe. They are the people that march in "lock-step" as opposed to those that march to "the beat of a different drummer".

My Way or the Highway
According to John Dean, who wrote in Conservatives Without Conscience,
"Many conservatives, particularly those who are clearly authoritarians,
are not aware of their illogical, contradictory, and hypocritical thinking. If made cognizant of it, they either rationalize it away, neglect to care, or attack those who reveal their human weaknesses.

Because such thinking seems to be a reality of contemporary conservatism,anyone operating from a logical mind or has the inclination toward a reasoned judgment will have a problem with this." Dean adds that right-wing authoritarianism reveals itself in three ways:

Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submissiveness to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.

Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness directed against deviants, outgroups, and other people that are perceived to be targets according to established authorities.

Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the traditions and social norms that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities.

In North America these traits are seen more readily in those with conservative political leanings. To break this down even further, one can examine the following symptoms that reveal the authoritarian personality organized into four distinct catagories.

1: Faulty Reasoning — Right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) are more likely to:
Make many incorrect inferences from evidence.
Hold contradictory ideas that result from a cognitive attribute known as compartmentalized thinking, as illustrated by Orwellian doublethink.

Uncritically accept that many problems are ‘our most serious problem.’
Uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs.
Uncritically trust people who tell them what they want to hear.
Use many double standards in their thinking and judgments.

2: Hostility Toward Outgroups — RWAs are more likely to:
Weaken constitutional guarantees of liberty such as a Bill of Rights
Severely punish ‘common’ criminals in a role-playing situation.
Admit they obtain personal pleasure from punishing such people.
Be prejudiced against and hostile towards racial, ethnic, national,
sexual, and linguistic minorities.
Volunteer to help the government persecute almost anyone.
Be mean-spirited toward those who have made mistakes and suffered.

3: Profound Character Attributes — RWAs are more likely to:
Be dogmatic.
Be zealots.
Be hypocrites.
Be absolutists
Be bullies when they have power over others.
Help cause and inflame intergroup conflict.
Seek dominance over others by being competitive and destructive in situations requiring cooperation.

4: Blindness To One’s Own Failings And To The Failings Of Authority
Figures Whom They Respect— RWAs are more likely to:
Believe they have no personal failings.
Avoid learning about their personal failings.
Be highly self-righteous.
Use religion to erase guilt over their acts and to maintain their
These are the hallmarks of Right-wing Authoritarianism. Recognizing them and the degree to which a political party promotes them is a matter for the individual to determine.

Stanley Milgram; Obedience to Authority; Obedience and Individual
Bob Altemeyer; The Authoritarians, University of Manitoba; The
Authoritarian Spector, Harvard University
John Dean; Conservatives Without Conscience
George Orwell; "doublethink". 1984

Well said!
You can't reason with these neoConservatives, they've all got brain damage."

See everyone. All liberals ever have is nothing but name calling and personal insults and they are brainwashed into believing that = facts and reason. Hahahahaha

Well said!
You can't reason with these neoConservatives, they've all got brain damage.

And, where are we today?

That hypocrisy is on the part of liberals not G-d fearing conservatives.<br />
Jews (at least most, certainly the great sages like Rav Moshe Feinstien Ztzl for example) and who follow Torah for example and pay 3 times daily and keep Shabbos, don't even have TV's let alone even know who Kim Kardashian is. Now do they send their kids to public school to learn first hand about drugs in the schoolyard and how to be in a violent street gang and the gay sex agenda forced on the students by the liberals running the schools as well as all the teachers who molest their students as well as hypocritical TV shows like on that was on several ears ago called Dawsons Creek in which the teacher was having sex with her students.<br />
Soince the Hollywood libs are promoting such hypocrisy it is further hypocrisy to blame those who truly HAVE REAL family values.

@theadvantageoflife...What a crock!

Thanks for admitting to everyone that you have no facts or reason but want to attack, anyway.

When Obama got in office he and his liberals said they were going to cut out any discussion with or input from Republicans it was the Democrat way and no other choice. <br />
Liberals always talk about "compromise" by which they mean conservatives must lose their values and give in on everything but when conservatives turn the tables, suddenly the liberals cry foul. <br />
<br />
It is amazing how hateful liberals can be while complaining about hatred.<br />
Typical liberal hypocrisy.

"V," That's part of it. It's just the attitude all together. I understand they lost and can't further their agenda at this time but to be so hateful and snarky is messed up. So, I said my piece, whether you agree or not, I feel better! LOL<br />
<br />
As for the "family Values" issue. It's disgusting for the self righteous to think that just because a family doesn't believe as another family does, they're wrong. I didn't know anyone had the "Values" thing locked in. The Golden Rule is the Golden Rule.

I think a lot of people are like me. We absorb the political sensibilities of our families- like osmosis. I admire people who can rise above their idealogies and see things with clear eyes. But sometimes its just not possible. <br />
<br />
I remember, way back before the neo-conservatives reared their ugly war mongering head, Barbara Bush gave a speech at the convention that nominated her husband. That woman is a piece of work. It was all about traditional family values. She spent the entire speech patting herself and other traditional conservatives on the back for being oh so brave and doing the right thing in the face of the prevailing evil liberal culture. And what was this monumental achievment for which she crowed so righteously? Loving their families! That's right! If we elected her husband, you would usher in a movement of family lovers! As if liberals didn't love their families! What pompous arrogance. As if we needed a conservative goverment to back us up in our love for our families! I remember watching that convention realizing that not one speech had resonated with me. Not one. It might as well have been a tribe from Mars speechifying on that convention stage.

Well, you're probably referring to more than just keith over in the healthcare thread, but to be fair to him, we have lots of history so we tend to be snarky with each other.

Awww, Thank you, Liltm but you give me too much credit...I just do what I think is right. There's too much at stake, especially here in our state!<br />
<br />
"V," I agree with you about Clinton. He was very much a centrist aligning himself with the DLC. I was very much against NAFTA, and CAFTA. I really liked Ross Perot as a result! Still couldn't vote for him though! <br />
We're in a word of hurting here. I'm just disgusted at the way we're treated when we try to give our side of the story. The condescending way we're spoken to and treated like we don't know a thing. I'm done with it! LOL

I'd join the Jojo Club...she means business. She regularly pays visits to our capitol and tells them how to fix things. How cool is that?!

Oh drats, I was hoping to be part of that exclusive club... hehe

I was not referring to 6 members on EP, Vendetta.<br />
I was joking about the 6 Democrats in the extremely "moral " state that JoJo and I live in.

Wow, there's really 6 of us, Lilt? <br />
<br />
Even though I mostly agree with everything in this story, I think it's worth pointing out that there is plenty of blame to go around. I think that NAFTA turned out to be a huge blunder on Clinton's part, and very damaging to our economy, and despite what Republicans say, Clinton was not a liberal president. Just because you're more liberal than staunch conservatives doesn't mean you're liberal. <br />
<br />
Obama on the other hand is liberal, and is the first liberal president we've had since LBJ. (LBJ wasn't very liberal on Vietnam, but other than that, he was) But Obama has been forced to be more centrist due to the lack of cooperation he's received from the Senate. The house can't stop him from doing anything, but he needs at least 1 Republican on the major things, and that's made him have to move towards the center and give a lot. It makes you wonder what he'd be able to do if Saxby had lost his seat. Then it really would have been hell on Earth for conservatives! lol<br />
<br />
There are decent conservatives who hate those who've done so much damage in Republicans name the last decade. And there are decent Republicans which hate being associated with the moral majority and family values crowd. <br />
<br />
It's interesting that Eliot Spitzer was working on prosecuting many of the big fat cats that eventually brought our system down before he was caught with his pants down. It's too bad that our prudish country cares more about sex scandals than real scandalous stuff.

Very good, Jojo. You and I both know how prevalent the sheep mentality is in our area of the country. And I am ever so grateful to you and the other 6 Democrats who are representing us here. :)<br />
<br />
Let me worry about my family values. I just want my damned money back. And I want all these talking heads to shut up and start figuring out how to make that happen.

Thank you. I'm just sick of the one sided debate and how we are so condescendingly treated when we try to get our point across. I have rewritten my story. People are screaming about the very things that the people they supported caused!<br />
It's disgusting, frankly. (Jojo steps down from her soap box, before they shoot me down for speaking the truth. You know, the truth hurts!) :-)

I used to be quite conservative. Not quite fitting under the idea of "neocon" but conservative nonetheless. In recent times my views on things have changed to their point where I do not consider myself in that particular faction anymore. I'm not quite on the liberal side of things but I have a feeling that it's on it's way. For now I'm comfortable saying that I'm moderate.<br />
<br />
I have to agree with everything you've said in your story though. I'm tired of the intolerance conservatives have shown recently (and not so recently) and I am fairly proud to say that I am no longer one of them.<br />
<br />
Once again, great story Jojo :)