|
|
|
|
OT : Another poll to break Harry's (if he has one) heart
On 08 Jan 2004 23:52:14 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:
When your political icons are making statements accusing "all liberals, all
Democrats, all this, all that........" of being
anti-American, (and worse), that has nothing to do with issues. It's a tool
to
polarize society.
Not when those statements are followed up with examples to back them
up.
You make my case. What example could possibly be given of any behavior engaged
in by *all* of any group?
I don't deal in absolutes. They are too easy to invalidate. It only
takes one example. But if you change the statement to read "many" or
"a majority" it becomes much easier to substantiate.
Listen to your spokespeople. They don't defend issues or policies at
all.....they simply bad mouth anybody that might oppose a right wing agenda.
You mean in the same way that you demonize conservative radio by
calling it "hate"?
Back to my desktop dictionary.
Hate: To feel very strong dislike for.
And who on the conservative circuit has expressed a personal dislike
for anyone? They may dislike their policies. But it's not personal.
Which conservative radio programs do you listen to that do not express "very
strong dislike" for liberals?
I listen to Hannity fairly regularly, as he's on during my afternoon
drive time. He strongly refutes liberal policies, but he have never
made a statement of a personal nature that could be construed as
"hate". He is also not always in lock step with Bush. He (as I am) is
totally against this whole illegal immigrant amnesty program.
And that's what really bothers you guys on the left. The conservative
message is easier to understand, and breaks down easily into bite
sized bits that even the non-scholarly among us can understand
It's the same group of techniques that over the years have rallied the gullible
against "******s" "kikes" "spics" and what not.
There you go again, attempting to demonize the messengers and the
message by comparing similar techniques that were used to promote
ideals in the past which are now generally regarded as "bad". Dope
addicts routinely use needles to inject their poison. Does that mean
we should ban all needles?
If the ideas are sound, they will stand on their own.
The new buzzword is "lib". The rhetoric remains unchanged. The "non-scholarly"
are just as misled, just as angry, and just as manipulated.
Where there is smoke there is fire. Even if the Non_scholarly" do not
completely understand the nuances of many liberal ideas, they do
understand the final outcome. Anything which takes away from their
choices, and their financial sovereignty is a bad thing.
When you have people wanting to take your money away from you so that
someone can feel good about "helping" slackers and therefore promoting
the concept of entitlement, it should be no surprise that most people
with common sense would oppose it.
In order to adopt, much less understand the liberal
mindset you have to be willing to accept some idealistic utopian
principles which are foreign to the natural order of most people.
Again, you make my case. Thanks for the assistance.
Which is?
Dave
|