Finstone, about liberal ideas:

job is tough, because his side of the issues in impossible to defend against real ideas.

Do you honestly believe this? In every case? Do you ever find yourself agreeing with a liberal viewpoint on an issue over a conservative one?

I guess, based on the "I'm closer to Libertarian" comment, that you would virtually always pick conservative over liberal on any issue. Further, dude, you are WAY out on the right. It might not seen it (this is a Porsche forum after all).

The liberals who post around here are centre-left liberals (I'm guessing a little based on what I've seen posted) - yet you accuse them of being socialists. Its not like we have Pelican posters who are vigorously in favour of compulsory unions, price controls and a cradle to the grave welfare system.

Occasionally, if they bother to use any facts in their argument and it is not an outright fabrication, if it is somewhat logical, and they don't start calling people who don't agree names.

I like to address each issue individually. I don't fully agree with any one party. I believe strongly in national defense and a federal government that only does the things prescribed by the Constitution, no more. Liberatarian are not what would be considered mainstream conservative...while they believe in the least amount of govt possible, they also favor not becoming involved in foreign wars....and legalizing drugs. Some of my views would be repugnant to Republicans and Liberatarans.

There you go again....I believe you are quoting me incorrectly...ruins your entire argument......Did I call Pelicans socialists? However, I do suspect that there are posters here that certainly believe very strongly in social welfare.....whereas I do not.

It would appear, though, that you are ready to believe certain things quoted by specific pundits that prop your view of the world and dismiss potentially equally valid arguments from the "other side" when they do not fit the formula.

I will admit, some of your comments do inspire a desire to do a bit more research on my part, but then a lot of viewpoints do that; I tend to want to give all parties equal opportunities to state their beliefs. Sadly, in many cases, beliefs to not constitute facts. Simply because someone says "those are facts" does not make them so. I could go into chapter and verse on how people deal with either too much or too little data. Suffice to say, the world is easiest to deal with for those with the least information; decisions are simpler.

But, it takes a lot of different viewpoints to come up with a workable consensus in most cases.

I don't know....seems to me that I have only posted easily verifiable facts and little supposition. I have mostly only seen a lot of name calling and ill-defined accusations for response. Can you be specific? I would be happy to elaborate or provide references ..or if you have any evidence to the contrary...please post it.

I give up.....

Have enjoyed the exchange, however, and I am certain you will consider this a victory over an obviously inferior and misinformed soul....

I stated my case, specifically defined the difference between fact and conjecture. I can do no more.

Once again, thanks for the education.

Bob
I was not seeking the definitions...only specific cases...and those are your words, not mine. I personnally enjoy the debate..there are no winners or losers. Thanks for the pleasant exchange of ideas......makes one think.

"liberals who post around here are centre-left liberals "

Actually I am pretty far left. I tend not to post my beliefs anymore because each time I do, the response is nearly always unprovoked hatred and fear. One characteristic that people on the far right and far left share (usually) is the tendency to react with anger towards viewpoints that they don't understand - this is to what I have attributed some of the attacks that I have received over the past 3 years or so

(and I was pretty harshly attacked via PMs and IMs at one point, blasted with hatred by a troll that didn't want to discuss the issues, but only wanted to call me a Pinko and suggest that I should move to France so that I can be there when his army bombs it... very compassionate, that one)

Flintstone, you seem like a very rational person and fairly open to discussion - attributes that haven't exactly shone through in some of the more outspoken conservatives that I have spoken with... but I honestly don't know what these "facts" are that you keep bringing up, especially since you neglect to mention particular issues. I have always tried to get both sides of each issue; for example, I have read each of Bill O'Reilly's books as well as Michael Moore's, Noam Chomsky's, Howard Zinn's, etc... I hear a lot of Rush Limbaugh thanks to my very Republican father. Anyhow, my point is that BOTH sides present facts, and both sides are often right about the detail about which they are arguing. The problem is, they are often arguing about two completely different things.

I will no longer discuss the rights and wrongs of any particular issue on this forum thanks very much to the hate-filled attacks that I have witnessed as well as received. If you'd like to have a little tete-a-tete, feel free to PM me.

I've made a selective reply, because it will get too long:

Without making a lifes work of it, I'd say that conservative and liberal alike are about even in bandying around unsubstantiable "facts" and conjecture, and definitely on name calling. In fact, the GOP has probably pulled itself in the lead on the dirty tactics front in the last couple of weeks. The point is, you don't notice it when you firmly believe in the one sides viewpoint already. I often in fact wonder if I miss bias in opinions which reflect my own viewpoint (I think I do, but... I just don't know).

Yeah, you like low taxes and a small government - except the military, where you used to work. I've thought a lot about low (and flat) taxes - I just don't think it can work. As an example, a 20% flat tax - while theoretically feasible - is pretty much impossible. Admittedly, Hong Kong (and other places) achieve it, but its not going to happen without a hyper-capitalist society which doesn't value its disadvantaged. To replicate the broad standard of living in the US today would require far too much private altruism and/or a complete revamp of the family unit (the financial support has to come from somewhere).

Quote:

There you go again

It's a first (for me).

Quote:

....I believe you are quoting me incorrectly...ruins your entire argument......Did I call Pelicans socialists?

I checked and I was thinking of something else you said. Sorry :) I did misquote you - you didn't refer to anyone as socialist in as many words. You are very careful about name-calling, which is very cool :).

You called Kerry's proposed programmes as socialist (they're not really). Its a minor stretch, but to me this implies anyone who agrees with him holds socialist views. You didn't actually call anyone socialist, but I can feel you thinking it RIGHT NOW :D :D.

You are correct.
Going cheap on the military is like going cheap on condoms.....proper protection is priceless.........................

I'm still picking you as not much further than me. For instance, I make a huge differentiation between a welfare safety net (in NZ, and I suspect in the US, it would SUCK to live on a benefit) and a gold-plated cradle to the grave welfare system covering all eventualities. I really do think the latter creates a disincentive to finding employment.

PM me if you like :D

I'm on extremely tricky ground now (not only have I never gone anywhere the military myself, NZ doesn't even really have a military worth worrying about).

To follow the condom analogy, it seems to me like the Us' got the extra safe condoms, and is wearing about a dozen of them at a time. Plus, it sleep with multiple partners, rather than carrying them around in the wallet.

As someone who lives in another country, I actually don't appreciate US foreign policy (meddling) right now.

Good comeback...I will try to continue in the same vein:

When it comes to necessary protection, you really don't care if your buddy thinks your condom is necessary or not...if he is wrong--will he be paying the child support or will you? If he doesn't appreciate your caution.....He can choose to mind his own business (after all, it is your woody) or stop being your friend....guess it depends on how close the friendship is.

CJFusco
Come back!!!You seem pretty reasonable to me and somewhat open-minded (unlike most of us). You are well read and one of the few folks posting that might actually be bright enough, thoughtful enough, and young enough to change their opinion on a topic. Ignore the name callers....we all get caught up in emotion sometimes. You know what they say...never talk religion or politics.....but if we can't do that with folks that share our other interests (like cool cars)..who can we talk to? Besides...we both know it is the guys with Carreras that are just compensating for their tiny little .......................

Well, I'm pleasantly surprised by some folks' remarks here and perhaps a little unpleasantly surprised at others. 350 makes more sense here than I thought I had seen elsewhere, and I think Flint is indeed more "independent" and open to the other side of these issues than even he thinks.

Unfortunately Franken's radio adventure is probably not going to make the splash I'd like it to make, simply because his approach has no chance of competing with the theatrical tone of the conservative talk shows. If and when his show comes to my area, I'll listen to it, and maybe it will be a commercial success. I'll listen for purposes of getting information and witnessing an actual discussion of the issues, facts and viewpoints. Any of you who think you're listening to right-wing shows for those reasons are deluded. When an intelligent liberal or independent gets on one of those shows with information or good questions, they are interrupted mercilessly until the host can think of some ugly-but-entertaining names to call them, and then the discussion is ended. I know you conservatives are entertained and validated by these shows, but you are not being informed by them. I'd say the most intelligent and best informed citizens I meet are the moderates and independents, followed closely by the downright liberals. Hard core conservatives in virtually all cases use rhetoric exclusively. Again, it is a brute fact that conservatism and education are inversely correlated. Education, it seems causes independent and liberal thinking. that's why universities and media people seem more liberal. They are better informed. Al Franken is liberal and fairly smart (no surprise there), and he will absolutely crucify any loudmouth conservative that dares to come to his radio party. The conservative will be the better name-caller, but will lose each substantive argument.

Superman, I let this go the first time. So much much for your "brute fact". Where do you get this stuff? You are 180 degrees out of phase with reality.


In the 1994-2002 General Social Surveys (GSS), Republicans have over 6/10ths of a year more education on average than Democrats. Republicans also have a higher final mean educational degree. Further, Republicans scored better than Democrats on two word tests in the GSS--a short vocabulary test and a modified analogies test.

If one breaks down the data by party affiliation and political orientation, the most highly educated group is conservative Republicans, who also score highest on the vocabulary and analogical reasoning tests. Liberal Democrats score only insignificantly lower than conservative Republicans. The least educated subgroups are moderate and conservative Democrats, who also score at the bottom (or very near the bottom) on vocabulary and analogy tests.

Daddy, I'm interested in what this "General Social Surveys" is and who conducts it. Please provide a link. I'll be finding more specific data as I find time, hopefully today, but I have meetings the rest of this morning and just as busy this afternoon. In the meantime, here is the US Census data which clearly shows that the strip of Southern states, noted for their conservative thinking is in the basement so to speak in terms of education, and that the parts of our country noted for liberal thinking are at the top of the chart (Northeast and West). Again, more specific data is available and I'll dig that up.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-24.pdf

You gotta be kidding. You post a study showing the south "leans" republican and you think that means libs are smarter? Fair enough I'll back this up soon. I first learned this from my left leaning government instructor in High School. At least he was honest:)

Again, more US Census data by region. I recognize that "region" is just a proxy for "political affilliation," but all legitimate data is going to bear out my assertion. As always, you're going to see me reject reports by organizations that have an axe to grind. Don't even think about showing me Cato Institute stuff.

http://www.census.gov/apsd/wepeople/we-11.pdf

Superman
Appreciate the tone of your last post....but respectfully disagree. I personally have become a little more conservative with every year of education...and at least on paper...I am very well educated. I believe you to be correct regarding educators (quite liberal), but every study that I have been privy to, also indicates that the average person education major is in the bottom 20 percent of their college class in both test scores and grades (probably lots of exceptions for sharp people with a calling). And, of course, since most educators are liberal (almost to the point of being radical), not many conservative are attracted to the field and the ones that are get summarily screwed and leave. The media is much the same. Try to get a typical news source to produce a conservative story. Better yet, prove it yourself..send a well written, well thought out editorial to your local liberal paper...guaranteed it won't be printed. Then send in a similar version later with bad grammar and unfounded conservative supposition...they immediately print it so they can make fun of you.

Calling me dishonest?