The conservative movement is still obsessed with the stereotypes of the 60s. Those old resentments don't mean nearly as much to the young.Comment Posted By angullimala On 23.02.2010 @ 18:37
It appears to me that on the left, there is the feeling that whatever you earn belongs to the government and it is up to government to decide how much of your money you can keep.
Oh, come on.
What the liberals I know tend to believe is that society provides a lot of things that allow individuals to "earn" their money and that the individuals should therefore pony up society's cut of the loot.
You are missing the point. The very fact that you put "earn" in quotes makes my case. It's not "society's" (government's) decision to seize an individual's property. The only right they have to our property is that which is given by the people. The people give their consent for government to tax them. They may not consent to every detail that government will use their property for. But the principle stands. And when government misuses taxes that have been granted it by the people, citizens have a perfect right and obligation to throw the rascals out.
ed.Comment Posted By angullimala On 16.02.2010 @ 17:05
It makes the allegations that he overdubbed the audio in his ACORN tapes, to misrepresent the conversation he had with them, seem a little more credible.Comment Posted By angullimala On 26.01.2010 @ 17:51
What they do see, and are frightened about, is the national debt projected to top $37 Trillion in 10 years .... So my circle of conservative friends are looking for fiscal common sense
The problem is that lots of us just do not believe this.
I don't believe it because I see many TBs as inconsistent supporters of fiscal responsibility. Specifically, I see many TBs as people whose concern for fiscal responsibility is greatly dependent on whether or not they like who is spending the money and what the money in question is being spent on.Comment Posted By angullimala On 13.01.2010 @ 18:15
So are you saying that believing them is the default position? It should be the opposite. You should see no reason to believe their analyses or conclusions if you haven’t a clue…
Does this mean I shouldn't believe what my doctor says since I have no clue about medicine.Comment Posted By angullimala On 8.12.2009 @ 17:07
There seems to be a default assumption that the bias is 100% "political" and a total lack of attention paid to the idea that scientists are often biased in favor of their careers.
When a guy earns his money studying Global Warming he is going to be biased in favor of the theory that AGW is a serious problem.
Then again, the people who make their money peddling conspiracy theories are biased in favor of interpreting things as ... politically motivated conspiracies instead of just self-interested careerism.Comment Posted By angullimala On 7.12.2009 @ 17:26
It is when, how, and what aid and comfort it may give the bottom feeding Liberals.
1) Somehow I suspect it wasn't an accident that you pick the words from the definition of "treason" in the constitution.
2) Did it ever occur to you that the people giving us the most "aid and comfort" are the Palinites who want that unelectable bimbo to be the face of their party?Comment Posted By angullimala On 4.12.2009 @ 17:05
Dave FTWComment Posted By angullimala On 1.12.2009 @ 17:18
So the question isn’t really a military one. It is a question of character. The real question should be; How similar is the character of today’s American to that of the World War II generation? Are we made of the same stuff?
The "greatest generation" giot bashed by their parents when they were the youth in the 30s and blamed by their elders for all the troubles in America at that time. Now we think of them as so, like, totally awesome to the max!
People have been saying this exact stuff from the beginning of time. I can point you to ancient Greek writers who mourned how their contemporaries lacked the "character" of the victors of Marathon. I can point you to an ancient Sumerian tablet from circa 3000 BC that consists of an older mans lament on how the young people are no good these days.
It's all bullshit.Comment Posted By angullimala On 20.11.2009 @ 16:12
The more I think about it though,
It is a false dichotomy to assume that the only to options are that he was an irretrievable nutcase or a completely normal person who was "pushed over the edge" by some particular thing.
It is totally plausible that counceling wounded vets could make a stressed & depressed person even more stressed and depressed. The same would be true of counceling victims of CSA and hearing day after day of stories of adults who molest children, or any other job involving constant exposure to unpleasant realities.
While this might not make the majority of the populace snap, it is possible that it might make a person who is already suffering from a chemical imbalance in the brain (depression, bipolar, whatever) snap.
Similar with the whole "Islam caused it" thing. A guy who is on the borderline anyway might well seek out a radical cause, religious or not, to give him the feeling his life has meaning again. This doesn't mean that "Islam" in general is to blame or that listening to a radical imam is likely to turn a mentally healthy muslim into a terrorist.
The same is true of he whole Pittsburgh shooter thing. It might well be true that listening to Glen Beck was the proverbial straw that broke the camels back, but that doesn't necessarily mean that Glen Beck is "responsible" in any reasonable meaning of the term. The guy was borderline. The world is filled with things that could set off such a person.
It doesn't seem that subtle to me. In large numbers the distribution of damn near any, and all but the simplest, biological trait approximates the normal distribution. That means that there are going to be people who appear to be within the range we would define as "normal" but close enough to be pushed over into "crazy" by things that would not push the vast majority of people over.Comment Posted By angullimala On 6.11.2009 @ 19:11
Pages (2) :  2